24th October, 2008
Video Calibration: Is It Worth It?
Mike Wood
This issue, The Integrator introduces its second columnist: A/V expert Mike Wood. Mike has worked on the staffs of Home Theater and Digital TV magazines, and as an assistant to video guru Joe Kane. He is now TV Test Manager for Samsung Electronics. We’re immensely proud to add such a widely acknowledged authority to the newsletter’s roster. –Brent Butterworth
Calibrating television displays has become big business, but should you jump in? Companies like the Imaging Science Foundation and THX, Inc charge sizable sums for you to attend their instructional classes, while measurement equipment companies like Sencore, Data Color and Konica Minolta wait in the wings to sell you expensive color meters and test generators. Some consumers are willing to spend several hundred bucks to have their TVs professionally adjusted. Even big-box retailers like Best Buy sell the service to their customers. But while TVs of even a few years ago may have been horribly miscalibrated to achieve sales floor appeal, modern televisions—with their multiple picture memories and color adjustments—make a much more calibrated image available with just a press of a button. It’s enough to make you wonder if the calibration process is still necessary.
I do believe that a calibrated picture looks better than the average show floor image. For the sake of this argument, I will define “calibration” as the adjustment of a set’s so-called color temperature using a color meter. One could go further and include the adjustment of the actual primary and secondary colors themselves, a feature increasingly available on better displays. The adjustment of basic signal levels, like brightness and contrast, can also be considered a level of calibration, (and perhaps even more beneficial), but the tools and instructions needed to use them are available on a $40 Blu-ray disc or DVD.
Metered calibration is where things get interesting. For the sake of this article, I’m only talking about TVs, not two-piece projection displays, as the latter can’t be factory-calibrated for a given screen material. As the TV test manager for Samsung Electronics, I compare our TV sets with competitors, and I also verify the measurement results of our TVs that go to and come back from equipment reviewers. I’ve noticed a few things. For one, TVs from major manufacturers usually have a setting that comes reasonably close to 6500 Kelvin (the industry standard measure of a set’s color temperature). Secondly, what differences do exist rarely amount to much in a comparative analysis. Third, measurements from different people don’t match. What I might read as 6500 Kelvin, one reviewer might measure as 6300K, and another might say is 6700K. Both reviewers argue that the set needs calibration, and after adjusting levels up or down, declare the set as “improved” and much more accurate.
One can argue that the reviewers are compensating for differences in their source equipment. But if two different Blu-ray players output color temperature settings that are several hundred degrees apart, something is horribly wrong. It’s far more likely that different equipment will need slight adjustments to settings like brightness and contrast.
Different TV settings and tolerances between measurement equipment likely account for the majority of the disparity in results. Samsung uses a Photo Research PR650, a $20,000 color meter that, even though it’s considered the standard for accuracy, can measure up to 250 Kelvin (degrees) different from another PR-650—on the same display, with the same source equipment—and still be considered within spec. Lesser equipment can have even greater tolerances. But if two or three calibration experts using different equipment can’t agree on how the same set should measure, then how can we argue that one setting is more accurate than another? And we haven’t even touched on competence. I’m confident of the reviewers’ skill sets, but what of most calibration class graduates? Given that you can get a fairly accurate image from many manufacturers with just a change of the picture memory setting, it’s enough to question the process as a whole.
I don’t discount the process entirely. While metered calibration may not be as exact a science as many make it out to be, it can bring widely out-of-range displays, like second- or third-tier brands, back into the realm of the reasonable. And there is a small group of enthusiasts who appreciate knowing that their TV is “accurate.” Plus, how can you keep the manufacturers on their toes if you can’t measure their equipment to know what it’s doing?
More importantly, though, in addition to the profit stream produced by tweaking picture controls, many retailers and installers are finding that their “calibrated” clientele tend to be happier than normal customers, and may even have fewer product returns. One reasons for this is because otherwise simple problems are easily overcome when the installer is there to witness them firsthand. He or she can also verify that all of the system’s settings, not just the TVs, are properly adjusted. And even just knowing that the product is professionally calibrated can relieve an immense amount of anxiety for many people.
While these are good reasons for integrators to spend the $1,000+ entrance fee for a training program, or the $2,500 cost of a measurement tool, I do believe installers have a moral obligation to at least show their customers what the image looks like when you switch their display out of the factory default memory and into one of the more accurate modes. Some customers will want to go further and get professional calibration. But the greatest benefit may come more from the in-home personal service and attention than any change to the set’s gray scale.
Posted at 1:00 am | Comments (8)
10th October, 2008
3D For The Home: Reality or Illusion?
Brent Butterworth
Integrators often greet new technologies with trepidation rather than zeal. Most dealers we’ve talked with feel it’s more important for an A/V system to work than for it to include all the latest technology. And all too often, the bugs in new technologies haven’t been worked out before they hit the market.
The latest technology that has integrators curious but cautious is 3-D. There’s a lot of buzz about the resurgence of this decades-old technology. About a year ago, Samsung introduced the first TVs designed to accommodate 3-D gaming; now Mitsubishi is also offering 3-D sets. Da-Lite and JVC put on impressive 3-D demos at September’s CEDIA Expo. Last week, Sony introduced a new 3-D optical adapter that makes it easy and relatively affordable for digital cinemas to show 3-D movies; its demo at Sony Studios’ Culver City, Calif., headquarters blew us away. As a Sony spokesperson told The Integrator this week, having more outlets for 3-D will spur more moviemakers to deliver 3-D content—and the more 3-D content there is, the more consumers will demand it in their homes.
So is 3-D capability something that integrators need to consider when specifying new systems? Let’s look at the prospects….
3-D 101
It helps to start with an understanding of the technologies now in use for 3-D. The 3-D technology currently found in such sets as Samsung’s HL61A750 61-inch DLP rear-projection TV relies on special electronic glasses with LCD shutters. The TV alternates left-eye frames and right-eye frames; for this to work well, the TV needs to have a refresh rate of 120 Hz, so it can show 60 Hz video to each eye. The shutters in the glasses alternate to block left-eye content from reaching the right eye, and right-eye content from reaching the left eye.
From a display standpoint, there’s no great technical hurdle to clear here—there are plenty of DLP and LCD displays now with a 120 Hz refresh rate. However, there’s no video format that currently supports 120 Hz, which is why existing 3-D TVs can perform their tricks only when attached to a computer, and only with video games designed for 3-D. Also, the glasses need to receive a timing signal so the left and right LCD shutters “close” and “open” at the correct times.
It’s possible all of this can be incorporated into the Blu-ray “standard,” and it’s likely we’ll see 3-D capability in at least some of the next generation of video game consoles. But for now, it’s all via computers and it’s all from video games.
OLD-SCHOOL OPTICAL
Theatrical 3-D systems now in use rely on a more organic, analog way of creating 3-D. An optical device that attaches to the front of the projector polarizes the alternate left-eye and right-eye frames in opposite circular patterns—clockwise for the right eye, counterclockwise for the left eye. Glasses with one clockwise-polarized lens and one counterclockwise-polarized lens prevent the right eye from seeing left-eye frames and the left eye from seeing right-eye frames.
The advantage of this method is that it uses polarized glasses that are more comfortable and hugely less expensive than the electronic shutter glasses used for today’s 3-D TVs. The downside is that it requires an optical adapter on the front of the projector that must be moved or deactivated when conventional 2-D content is shown.
How this type of system might translate to home use isn’t clear. Of course, moving anamorphic lenses have become the norm in high-end home theaters, so it’s at least conceivable that an optical 3-D adapter could work in with a home video projector. But it’s hard to believe that the likes of Sony and Panasonic would put their efforts into a scheme with such a small potential audience. What seems more likely is polarization done using electronic, rather than optical, processing.
THE BOTTOM LINE
The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) is putting together a task force to develop 3-D standards for the home. A company called Sensio, which has for a few years now been selling 3-D systems that use specially encoded video, is working to license a 3-D compression/decompression technology to manufacturers. (JVC used Sensio’s technology in its demo of 3-D at CEDIA.) It’s great to see people putting effort into 3-D, but important to realize these are just efforts, which may or may not bear fruit at some indeterminate point in the future.
Now that you’ve got every dimension, in brief, of what’s going on with 3-D, the future from your standpoint should be clear: It’s not something you should worry about right now. From the home theater standpoint, there are no standards. There don’t even seem to be any proposed standards.
For now, the best solution for integrators who want to offer their clients the excitement of 3-D is to get one of the 3-D TVs already on the marketplace, set up a computer gaming system to go with it, and let the kids have at it.
Posted at 6:32 pm | Comment (1)
10th October, 2008
Ominmount Steps Out For Breast Cancer Awareness
Michael Verity
A tip of the hat to our colleagues at Omnimount for their energetic support of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
They’re going pink by auctioning off a special, one-of-a-kind, hot pink Prism 50 from their Karim Collection to support Breast Cancer Awareness. The auction will begin October 20th on eBay with 100% of the proceeds going to the American Cancer Society Making Strides Against Breast Cancer fund.
In November, a gang of sneaker-clad Omnimounters, along with their friends and family, will participate in the American Cancer Society Making Strides 5K walk at Tempe Town Lake in Arizona. You can contribute to the Omnimount team by clicking here or go to the Making Strides Home Page to track down a team that’s walking in your area.
Posted at 6:25 pm | Comment (0)
