Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 184
  1. #31
    Josh Z's Avatar
    Josh Z is offline HDD Blogmaster General
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,526

    Default

    Here we go again. The same two trolls trolling yet another Darbee thread. Must we go through these same arguments again and again and again?

    Quote Originally Posted by tele1962 View Post
    I will try and leave it at that as your clearly are not going to listen to anyone on this one, and continue with your tirade of insults...........from the same thread and I quote " Kind Of Sad".
    To everyone at home keeping count, this marks the first time in this thread that tele1962 has sworn that he's had his last word and will be leaving the thread. Judging by his participation in the last Darbee thread, we can expect him to do this 20-30 more times.
    Josh Z
    Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
    Curator, Laserdisc Forever
    My opinions are strictly my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

  2. #32
    Josh Z's Avatar
    Josh Z is offline HDD Blogmaster General
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krawk View Post
    I personally have not seen results from a Darby but do feel an enhancement is altering the source material. Hey, maybe it does look better. Is there data somewhere though that shows image data being left the same or detail being lost? Sort of like the bozos that crank the "sharpness" way up thinking they're making their picture sharper when in fact they're just reducing the resolution.

    I am not closeminded to the idea but would like more real info before deciding.
    Krawk, try to keep an open mind. Have you calibrated your display? If so, you have used electronic processing to manipulate and alter the source signal. Have you ever upgraded your TV to a newer model that has a better picture? Well, if the first TV displayed exactly what was in the source, how could any other TV possibly have a better picture? That should be impossible, if you saw exactly what was on the disc.

    Of course, you didn't see exactly what was on the disc, and you still aren't. Consumer displays are not capable of resolving exactly what's in the source.

    If your TV/projector uses any form of dynamic contrast or gamma adjustment to improve contrast and black levels (and almost all displays do these days), that makes a much broader, coarser and more distracting change to the source signal than anything Darbee does.

    Darbee processing makes a very subtle enhancement that improves the clarity of detail in the picture by making small, targeted changes to the luminance of specific parts of the frame. When used at the proper settings (generally less than 50%), it does this without altering the original detail, adding false detail that wasn't there previously, or causing noticeable artifacts. What it looks like is that the picture has very slightly popped into better focus, as if you've upgraded your TV to the next model up, and for around only $300. I'm sure you paid more than $300 the last time you upgraded your TV.

    DarbeeVision has a fair return policy if you try it and decide you don't like it. Users who have used it almost unanimously choose to keep it. The only people vocally opposed to it are those who have never used it and only object out of some misguided sense of principle.
    Josh Z
    Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
    Curator, Laserdisc Forever
    My opinions are strictly my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

  3. #33
    Naiera's Avatar
    Naiera is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Here we go again. The same two trolls trolling yet another Darbee thread. Must we go through these same arguments again and again and again?
    I see only one troll here. You've long since given up on any sort of debate and resorted to name-calling not befitting a member of the staff of this site.

    I'd appreciate not being mentioned along with tele1962 in these threads. Anyone not blinded by Darblee-love should be able to see that my posts are on a completely different level. Also note that I only decided to participate in this thread after another user expressed his doubts as to the benefits of using a device such as the Darblee.

  4. #34
    Naiera's Avatar
    Naiera is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Have you calibrated your display? If so, you have used electronic processing to manipulate and alter the source signal.
    This is completely wrong. If the display has been calibrated according to proper standards (who doesn't do that?), it is displaying the source material as correctly as possible, given the equipment available. This is NOTHING like using a Darblee.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Have you ever upgraded your TV to a newer model that has a better picture? Well, if the first TV displayed exactly what was in the source, how could any other TV possibly have a better picture? That should be impossible, if you saw exactly what was on the disc.
    The first TV didn't display exactly what was on the disc. The second TV doesn't either. No matter how expensive, there will always be a better display. Of course, when you're hanging out with $40,000 3-chip DLP projectors, there's not a lot to gain, but there's always a better display (projector) out there. A Blu-ray disc has the potential for very large and very good looking moving pictures, and using a Darblee to alter the source is obviously not the way to get closer to seeing what you should be seeing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Of course, you didn't see exactly what was on the disc, and you still aren't. Consumer displays are not capable of resolving exactly what's in the source.
    I'm VERY excited to read on and see how in the world you're going to turn this into an argument for using the Darblee...

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    If your TV/projector uses any form of dynamic contrast or gamma adjustment to improve contrast and black levels (and almost all displays do these days), that makes a much broader, coarser and more distracting change to the source signal than anything Darbee does.
    All of this stuff is turned off if the calibrator-dude knows what he's doing. Obviously.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Darbee processing makes a very subtle enhancement that improves the clarity of detail in the picture by making small, targeted changes to the luminance of specific parts of the frame. When used at the proper settings (generally less than 50%), it does this without altering the original detail, adding false detail that wasn't there previously, or causing noticeable artifacts. What it looks like is that the picture has very slightly popped into better focus, as if you've upgraded your TV to the next model up, and for around only $300. I'm sure you paid more than $300 the last time you upgraded your TV.
    All of this is just another way of saying that the Darblee alters the source material. We're not supposed to do that. Ever.

    Also, read the absurd claims in the news article on this site, that obviously talks about changing the source material completely arbitrarily.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    The only people vocally opposed to it are those who have never used it and only object out of some misguided sense of principle.
    I don't know how the Darblee made you resistant to the logic of how to achieve good, correct picture quality, but somehow it has. And as you well know, but for some reason refuse to acknowledge (out of some misguided sense of loyalty to the Darblee?), not everybody, reviewers and industry folk alike, like what the Darblee does.

    And no, Joe Kane has NEVER OK'ed the use of the Darblee in the quest for good and correct picture quality. He's a nice guy, so if someone asked him to comment on a "Darblee-powered setup", he obviously just chose to be polite and not rag on it. He pulls no punches and would call a BD player with faulty chroma upsampling broken. How in the world could anyone think he would approve of the Darblee?
    Last edited by Naiera; 09-25-2013 at 10:28 PM.

  5. #35
    Plissken99's Avatar
    Plissken99 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    I don't know why you would think that this is news to me. It doesn't validate the use of a Darblee or anything like it to achieve correct picture quality.
    Because your argument doesn't invalidate the Darbee. As long as it is not detrimental to the image, there is nothing wrong with it, either you like it or don't, and you guys haven't seen one in action. You and tele have yet to produce a real factual argument against the device. At the proper settings it creates no artifacts, it doesn't generate detail that isn't in the source, it just makes it clearer, and does nothing to mask any detail.

    I love the way my JVC projector produces an image. Users of other projectors say they don't, it doesn't do this or that. Those are opinions, they prefer the way other displays make the source material look. The Darbee does NOT alter whats on the disc, that is fact.

    Given that FACTUAL data, and that you haven't seen it in action means you are trolling at this point. You can like the effect, or not like it, but you have see it to have a valid opinion of it.

    Of course Josh has resorted name calling, as I had in the other thread. This isn't a debate anymore, the points have been made on both sides, you guys just keep going round and round about the same non facts that got out argued on page 2 of the original thread. If you can't explain WHY something bad, other than "it's bad", you've got nothing on your side, nothing. I've been on the wrong side of many arguments, I don't stand there repeating crap like a 6yr old going "nah ah" for all eternity, I acknowledge I am wrong, learn something and move on with my life.
    HT gear: JVC X570r 4K e-Shift projector, 150" screen, Yamaha CX-A5100 preamp, Klipsch ProCinema 7.2.4 Atmos,Oppo UDP-203(region free), Xbox One, Playstation 4, RetroN 5, , Xbox 360, Toshiba XA2

  6. #36
    The Limey's Avatar
    The Limey is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,014

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    This is completely wrong. If the display has been calibrated according to proper standards (who doesn't do that?), it is displaying the source material as correctly as possible, given the equipment available. This is NOTHING like using a Darblee.
    You are having a laugh - of course calibration involves the use electronic processing....



    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    The first TV didn't display exactly what was on the disc. The second TV doesn't either. No matter how expensive, there will always be a better display. Of course, when you're hanging out with $40,000 3-chip DLP projectors, there's not a lot to gain, but there's always a better display (projector) out there. A Blu-ray disc has the potential for very large and very good looking moving pictures, and using a Darblee to alter the source is obviously not the way to get closer to seeing what you should be seeing.
    How on earth would you know if the Darbee alters the source or in fact does anything else for that matter? You have never tried it.




    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    I'm VERY excited to read on and see how in the world you're going to turn this into an argument for using the Darblee...
    Actually the question in this case should be 'How in the world can someone with no experience whatsoever of the device turn this into an argument for not using the Darbee?'



    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    All of this stuff is turned off if the calibrator-dude knows what he's doing. Obviously.
    You cannot be serious - 'this stuff' is not turned off during calibration. Gamma is adjusted in any calibration as is any dynamic contrast. Neither are turned off, although automatic dynamic contrast may well be turned off though so as to allow for adjustment.



    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    All of this is just another way of saying that the Darblee alters the source material. We're not supposed to do that. Ever.
    Again how can you arrive at that conclusion when you have never used the device?





    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    I don't know how the Darblee made you resistant to the logic of how to achieve good, correct picture quality, but somehow it has. And as you well know, but for some reason refuse to acknowledge (out of some misguided sense of loyalty to the Darblee?), not everybody, reviewers and industry folk alike, like what the Darblee does.
    This is an amazing piece to read from someone who has never used the device and simply knows nothing about it....

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    And no, Joe Kane has NEVER OK'ed the use of the Darblee in the quest for good and correct picture quality. He's a nice guy, so if someone asked him to comment on a "Darblee-powered setup", he obviously just chose to be polite and not rag on it. He pulls no punches and would call a BD player with faulty chroma upsampling broken. How in the world could anyone think he would approve of the Darblee?
    No you are simply assuming that Joe Kane has never ok'd the use of a Darbee. Feel free to provide a link or any evidence that backs your claim on this.



    Naiera,
    I challenged you on your lack of knowledge in the previous thread when you did not know that algorithms actually make your HDTV perform. In this thread you have shown us even more ignorance of the subject by saying that gamma and dynamic contrast are turned off during calibration. Ditto your lack of knowledge that calibration DOES involve electronic processing...
    Add to the above the fact that you have never used the device, how on earth do you have the front to come here, slag off the device and the opinions of the people who have used it?
    TV - LG 65G6v OLED
    Panasonic UB900 UHD, Pioneer BDP-LX88 (Region B), and Oppo BDP-95 (multi-region)
    Onkyo DV-HD805, Toshiba XE1
    Receiver - Pioneer SC-LX90/SC-09TX Susano
    Sub - B&W ASW750
    Surround - 3 x B&W DM-601 S3
    Centre - JBL EC35
    Floorstanding - 2 x JBL ES100

  7. #37
    Naiera's Avatar
    Naiera is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    407

    Default

    My bad. I don't know why Josh lumped gamma adjustment in with dynamic contrast. One thing is a perfectly normal adjustment to do during calibration and the other is something you simply turn off.
    Last edited by Naiera; 09-26-2013 at 07:43 PM.

  8. #38
    Josh Z's Avatar
    Josh Z is offline HDD Blogmaster General
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    My bad. I don't know why Josh lumped gamma adjustment in with dynamic contrast. One thing is a perfectly normail adjustment to do during calibration and the other is something you simply turn off.
    Many displays move the gamma during dynamic contrast adjustment to ensure that shadow detail is still visible when the contrast clamps down.

    Even if you turn off dynamic adjustments, if you calibrate your gamma at all (and I should assume and hope that you have), you have by definition electronically altered the source signal so that it will look better on your display's panel. When you adjust the calibration settings in your display, you don't physically alter the panel in the slightest. You electronically manipulate the source signal to look better on that panel. These are facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    I see only one troll here. You've long since given up on any sort of debate and resorted to name-calling not befitting a member of the staff of this site.

    I'd appreciate not being mentioned along with tele1962 in these threads. Anyone not blinded by Darblee-love should be able to see that my posts are on a completely different level. Also note that I only decided to participate in this thread after another user expressed his doubts as to the benefits of using a device such as the Darblee.
    Have you used Darbee processing? No, you haven't. Yet in thread after thread, you feel compelled to post about how much you think this product you've never tested for yourself stinks.

    Flat-out, you are a troll in these threads, no better than tele1962.
    Josh Z
    Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
    Curator, Laserdisc Forever
    My opinions are strictly my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

  9. #39
    Naiera's Avatar
    Naiera is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Even if you turn off dynamic adjustments, if you calibrate your gamma at all (and I should assume and hope that you have), you have by definition electronically altered the source signal so that it will look better on your display's panel. When you adjust the calibration settings in your display, you don't physically alter the panel in the slightest. You electronically manipulate the source signal to look better on that panel. These are facts.
    You are not manipulating the source material by calibrating the gamma curve on your display; you're improving the performance of the display, making it conform to video standards better than at standard settings. That's what calibration is about. Getting the best out of a given display.

  10. #40
    tele1962 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
    Many displays move the gamma during dynamic contrast adjustment to ensure that shadow detail is still visible when the contrast clamps down.

    Even if you turn off dynamic adjustments, if you calibrate your gamma at all (and I should assume and hope that you have), you have by definition electronically altered the source signal so that it will look better on your display's panel. When you adjust the calibration settings in your display, you don't physically alter the panel in the slightest. You electronically manipulate the source signal to look better on that panel. These are facts.



    Have you used Darbee processing? No, you haven't. Yet in thread after thread, you feel compelled to post about how much you think this product you've never tested for yourself stinks.

    Flat-out, you are a troll in these threads, no better than tele1962.
    You keep mentioning me Josh.......now why would that be.......your also insisting I am a troll again why. I have provided all the testimony that I consider is needed, which up to now I am the one one who has done so. Naiere can claim to be on a different level if he wants but does no favour to the argument in saying so.

    Your argument regarding adjusting Gamma etc is the same as using the Darblet regarding digitally enhancing the image is so far off the mark it is unreal. Might I suggest that you book yourself into a ISF or THX training course and maybe this will help correct your misguided train of thought on this point, as these controls are used to get closer to the correct image without adding effects that will bring out detail that was never supposed to be seen in the first place............1080p BLU RAY DOES NOT NEED IT ALL THE INFORMATION YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO SEE IS ALREADY THERE, why enhance it to show more.

    We are now in an age where Film Restoration and Transfer are fantastic and Authoring facilities could be doing all of this right at the start of the process........but do they, no they do not, they give us what is as close as they can to the original intent of the film maker..........I have never once heard any authoring houses using the Darblet at point any where since the day it was released. Now you and one or two others can go on stamping your feet and ranting and raving but this is a fact........... as I have said in the past you can ask any one of MY FRIENDS from the Shootout or in the world of AV (and yes I do know them, it was me who introduced David Mackenzie to the guys over there, but they already new him of course from his reviews and no I am not Penton Man) they are all freely available.
    As long as you keep bringing my name back into this stupid argument I will continue to reply.

  11. #41
    Plissken99's Avatar
    Plissken99 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    You are not manipulating the source material by calibrating the gamma curve on your display; you're improving the performance of the display, making it conform to video standards better than at standard settings. That's what calibration is about. Getting the best out of a given display.
    HT gear: JVC X570r 4K e-Shift projector, 150" screen, Yamaha CX-A5100 preamp, Klipsch ProCinema 7.2.4 Atmos,Oppo UDP-203(region free), Xbox One, Playstation 4, RetroN 5, , Xbox 360, Toshiba XA2

  12. #42
    The Limey's Avatar
    The Limey is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,014

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tele1962 View Post
    As long as you keep bringing my name back into this stupid argument I will continue to reply.
    Well you have repeatedly said in the past that you are not going to come back and then Hey Presto there you are... A contradiction of yours that you have never bothered to actually rectify. All the more amusing really then to see you try to pin this now onto Josh Zyber for "bringing my name back into this stupid argument" and to threaten to keep returning on that basis.

    You say the argument is stupid and yet here you are, back again for more, and threatening to keep coming back ad infinitum to boot.
    If you are prepared to label this " a stupid argument' then what does that make you for saying that you intend to keep returning to it?
    TV - LG 65G6v OLED
    Panasonic UB900 UHD, Pioneer BDP-LX88 (Region B), and Oppo BDP-95 (multi-region)
    Onkyo DV-HD805, Toshiba XE1
    Receiver - Pioneer SC-LX90/SC-09TX Susano
    Sub - B&W ASW750
    Surround - 3 x B&W DM-601 S3
    Centre - JBL EC35
    Floorstanding - 2 x JBL ES100

  13. #43
    The Limey's Avatar
    The Limey is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kent, United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,014

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plissken99 View Post
    I am laughing more at this than I should basically.....
    TV - LG 65G6v OLED
    Panasonic UB900 UHD, Pioneer BDP-LX88 (Region B), and Oppo BDP-95 (multi-region)
    Onkyo DV-HD805, Toshiba XE1
    Receiver - Pioneer SC-LX90/SC-09TX Susano
    Sub - B&W ASW750
    Surround - 3 x B&W DM-601 S3
    Centre - JBL EC35
    Floorstanding - 2 x JBL ES100

  14. #44
    Josh Z's Avatar
    Josh Z is offline HDD Blogmaster General
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tele1962 View Post
    You keep mentioning me Josh.......now why would that be.......your also insisting I am a troll again why. I have provided all the testimony that I consider is needed, which up to now I am the one one who has done so. Naiere can claim to be on a different level if he wants but does no favour to the argument in saying so.
    Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back tele1962! Mark the record: True to form, this is his first reappearance after swearing that he was done with the thread. How many times will he do this? Someone want to set up a betting pool on that?
    Josh Z
    Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
    Curator, Laserdisc Forever
    My opinions are strictly my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

  15. #45
    Josh Z's Avatar
    Josh Z is offline HDD Blogmaster General
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naiera View Post
    You are not manipulating the source material by calibrating the gamma curve on your display; you're improving the performance of the display, making it conform to video standards better than at standard settings. That's what calibration is about. Getting the best out of a given display.
    And how exactly do you think that happens? Pray tell, what do you think goes on in your TV when you adjust a calibration setting?
    Josh Z
    Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
    Curator, Laserdisc Forever
    My opinions are strictly my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.1 PL1