TV settings?

[Jimmy Bro]

t

[Villiam Hayes]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Bro

What settings should my TV have? I've had it for a few years but have only recently noticed some of these settings.

DNR was somehow on so I immediately turned that crap off. Black Level Extender and White Peak Limiter were both on so I turned them off but couldnt notice a difference. I tried changing Flesh Tone and Luma Control and they both change the picture quite a lot, so I changed it back to on. I assume all this crap should be set to off but I'm not sure.

Current settings:
DNR - off (of course)
Black Level Extender - off
White Peak Limiter - off
CTI - medium
Flesh Tone - on
Adaptive Luma Control - on
Blue mute - on
Back light - 50/100

My picture is still good but I just wanna make sure I get the best quality possible

If you don't wish to pay the money to have it professionallly calibrated then I would recommend something like the Spears and Munsil disc.

[Lutra]

"Good" is always subjective. If you've watched it this way for years and have been pleased with the picture, why change what isn't broken?

I don't see anything on that list I would change.

[Alan Brown]

Originally Posted by Lutra

"Good" is always subjective. If you've watched it this way for years and have been pleased with the picture, why change what isn't broken?

I don't see anything on that list I would change.

"Good" is definitely not subjective in the context of achieving a correct video image. The motion imaging industries are governed by objective international standards and best practices. Display performance is considered good when it behaves according to these criteria. Video program reproduction strives to duplicate for the viewer what the program looked like when it was approved by the producer of the program. This approval is done on calibrated professional monitors, in controlled viewing conditions.

Consumer displays must behave like calibrated monitors if the same picture quality is to be enjoyed by the audience. The closer a TV gets to calibrated professional monitor performance, the less distorted the image will be. Human vision is very adaptable and can be conditioned to accept low grade video images. as "good." Most video consumers are never taught this and go through their whole lives thinking they must settle for guessing what the right picture adjustments are. The result may seem pleasing but may be a distortion of the intended image.

An objective reference must be used when adjusting video display controls, not subjective guesswork. One source for objective test signals to aid in picture adjustment is a good optical disc program, such as the Disney 'World Of Wonder,' 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics,' and/or the 'Spears & Munsil HD Benchmark.' Professional calibration services are also available from the ISF and THX organizations.

An excellent publication that details the early history of the Imaging Science Foundation and improved education in consumer video is available here: http://shop.widescreenreview.com/pro...wnload%29.html . It is an out of print special edition from 'Widescreen Review' magazine, titled: 'Imaging Science Theatre 2000- The Essential Resource Guide For Optimizing Picture Quality.'
This digital download costs $9.99 for a PDF file of over 300 pages.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

[Silo5]

Originally Posted by Alan Brown

"Good" is definitely not subjective in the context of achieving a correct video image. The motion imaging industries are governed by objective international standards and best practices. Display performance is considered good when it behaves according to these criteria. Video program reproduction strives to duplicate for the viewer what the program looked like when it was approved by the producer of the program. This approval is done on calibrated professional monitors, in controlled viewing conditions.

Consumer displays must behave like calibrated monitors if the same picture quality is to be enjoyed by the audience. The closer a TV gets to calibrated professional monitor performance, the less distorted the image will be. Human vision is very adaptable and can be conditioned to accept low grade video images. as "good." Most video consumers are never taught this and go through their whole lives thinking they must settle for guessing what the right picture adjustments are. The result may seem pleasing but may be a distortion of the intended image.

An objective reference must be used when adjusting video display controls, not subjective guesswork. One source for objective test signals to aid in picture adjustment is a good optical disc program, such as the Disney 'World Of Wonder,' 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics,' and/or the 'Spears & Munsil HD Benchmark.' Professional calibration services are also available from the ISF and THX organizations.

An excellent publication that details the early history of the Imaging Science Foundation and improved education in consumer video is available here: http://shop.widescreenreview.com/pro...wnload%29.html . It is an out of print special edition from 'Widescreen Review' magazine, titled: 'Imaging Science Theatre 2000- The Essential Resource Guide For Optimizing Picture Quality.'
This digital download costs $9.99 for a PDF file of over 300 pages.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Great post! This should be "cut & pasted" and included with every TV/projector sold. Nothing gets under my skin more than someone with a relatively nice set, but have it set wrong (i.e. Torch mode). It's the equivalent of nails on a chalk board to me.

[Lutra]

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I don't see a need to pay someone to do the same thing I'll ultimately do--play around with the settings until I find the right thing that works for my tv and surroundings. My tv is in a less than ideal space to watch. No man caves for me.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by Lutra

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I don't see a need to pay someone to do the same thing I'll ultimately do--play around with the settings until I find the right thing that works for my tv and surroundings. My tv is in a less than ideal space to watch. No man caves for me.

You can post up as many emoticons as you like, but there is no disagreeing with the facts in Alan Browns post. I actually saw your post before Alan responded and was going to reply with something along the same lines but nowhere near as detailed, however in the end I chose not to because it gets to a point where you get sick of reading and responding to similar posts such as yours, which seem to be mostly from new members that have nothing positive to share and contribute. Instead of coming here to learn and gain from the knowledge that is found on this site, you proceed to tell everyone that there is no point to almost everything that very experienced members have spent many hours of their spare time putting together for the purpose of trying to help others, just like you have done so far since joining in almost every post of yours, such as your views on how most dvd's are good enough therefore buying blu-ray's in many circumstances is a waste . If you haven't noticed this is a website which is mostly dedicated to blu-ray, not the prehistoric ideas of someone who is still living in 1998 that tries to justify why you are ultimately too cheap to move on from it.

Edit: Just like everyone here, you are free to do and spend your money on what you please, however don't patronise those who do the opposite to you by acting as if you are some how making the smart decisions, and implying the rest of us are not.

[Villiam Hayes]

I have to say that I agree with Mr Brown's and Cevoution's post's.

[Lutra]

Cevolution, just to make myself clear, I don't join forums to be the smart-alek troll. I joined here because I recently bought a blu-ray player, and my first blu-ray film and well, probably buy many more. I've finally reached a point where I can actually make use of the latest technology--took me six years because I didn't have the income. Why would I spend so much and then bash at it?

What I was trying to tell the OP is that everyone's situation is different. Not everyone has projectors in the ceilings and 7.1 surround systems, so in essence there are different setups that make sense based on your environment. From what I saw on my tv when I was setting it up, I said that it didn't sound like he did anything wrong, and that he's going to live with the system therefore he should be happy with his choices. I don't quite see how that supports a "blu-ray sucks" theory.

[Lutra]

Just to add, I'm not here to start garbage on Christmas. If I said the wrong things that make me seem hyper-critical of blu-ray, well, I'm sorry if it came off as that. I take lots of stuff and advice with a grain of salt, so a lot of "adjustments" and "paid for" stuff I'm typically skeptical about.

[steve1971]

[QUOTE=Villiam Hayes;6911273]I have to say that I agree with Mr Brown's and Cevoution's post's.[/QUOT

I agree as well.