Darblee Darblet Video Enhancement Tool.

[Plissken99]

Regardless of what 'the experts' say, there are adverse effects to this sort of processing.

Says who? Where's your proof? llo?

A good display does this with as little processing as possible.

Not true, otherwise people wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for external processors which can do a better job than the display(or any display) such as Lumagen products. If we're to hold everything to the same standard that your holding the Darblee, well then the CMS system in a Lumagen Radiance processor is bunk because it changes what was intended by the TV manufacturer!

This is bad no matter how fancy the end result might look, because it removes you from the intended

Stop saying intended, by your own admissions we've established that no consumer HDTV accuratly represents "what was intended".

Any level-headed expert on picture quality would not advise anyone to use such a device.

Really? Because I've read many reviews from people I know to be level headed, JoshZ not being the least of them who recommend the Darblee. Of course you'll say anyone who recommends it isn't level headed, thus proving that your opinion is the only one that matters. Right?

[JSmith]

If the mission is to ruin picture quality, then it is most certainly accomplished. Some people also like putting their displays on 'Dynamic' and leaving it there to burn their eyes day after day. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to educate them on PQ.

PQ is a matter of opinion, it is entirely subjective. Some people will like a particular look and some people won't. There are many times that HDD reviews will be subject to different opinions, that is life.

What makes your opinion superior to everyone else's?

[Naiera]

Not true, otherwise people wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for external processors which can do a better job than the display(or any display) such as Lumagen products. If we're to hold everything to the same standard that your holding the Darblee, well then the CMS system in a Lumagen Radiance processor is bunk because it changes what was intended by the TV manufacturer!

You seem to have a very weak grasp of the topic at hand, especially considering your impressive setup. But the wise ones pay other people to do their calibration-work for them; that's much more effective than learning how to do it all yourself.

The CMS in the Lumagen RadianceXD in my setup, for example, helps the JVC projector reproduce colours more accurately. Thus it does exactly what we want, which is help us enjoy the movie or tv series as close as possible to what is intended by the director.

I don't know what you're on about regarding the TV manufacturer. He usually makes TVs that sell rather than look good in people's living rooms.

Stop saying intended, by your own admissions we've established that no consumer HDTV accuratly represents "what was intended".

How is that an argument for fucking things up further with a Darblet? Just because we can't get all the way there doesn't mean we shouldn't get as far as we can. All HDTV sets and projectors can be calibrated to some degree. We do this to get as close to correct as possible. This provides the best possible result and gets you the most enjoyment out of your movies and tv series.

And please don't put words in my mouth. There are consumer HDTVs out there that do a fine job. My setup (picture wise) can be done for $8000 (in Denmark, that is, so it should be cheaper in the US) and has colour reproduction that is as good as Hollywood screening theatres.

Really? Because I've read many reviews from people I know to be level headed, JoshZ not being the least of them who recommend the Darblee. Of course you'll say anyone who recommends it isn't level headed, thus proving that your opinion is the only one that matters. Right?

I too believed that JoshZ was one of the sharper tools in the shed, regarding PQ and such, before he fell for the Darblet. Now I don't know what to make of his opinions on these things. His Starship Troopers review is still pretty boss.

[Naiera]

PQ is a matter of opinion, it is entirely subjective.

No, it isn't. Good picture quality = correct picture quality.

Let's say you have a favourite movie and use that to 'calibrate' your tv and get the look you want. Move on to the next movie, and it'll look all different, because the director intended for that movie to look different from your favourite movie. This new movie doesn't look like you want it to. Isn't that horribly annoying?

I don't think that there are many who have actually experienced good, correct picture quality ever said they didn't like it. It usually goes down well, even with those who don't believe that there are standards that you calibrate according to, and such.

[Plissken99]

Actually I have a very firm grasp of what equipment does. You say the Darblee changes "what was intended". Well since displays can only display what their manufacturers intended, your argument is as ridiculous as saying a Lumagen processor changes what the manufacturer intended. Considering that there is ZERO evidence that the Darblee has a negative impact on PQ.

Ok I'm done, either you have some agenda, no grasp of logic, or are simply trolling, your on the ignore list. I'll post my HANDS ON opinion of the Darblee when I get it.

EDIT: Mike Parker, yet another hardcore A/V guy loves the Darblee. Back when I had a CRT projector and an HTPC I had one of his modded video cards, guy knows his stuff. http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewt...=367072#367072

[Seegs108]

You seem to have a very weak grasp of the topic at hand, especially considering your impressive setup. But the wise ones pay other people to do their calibration-work for them; that's much more effective than learning how to do it all yourself.

Are you seriously saying there is no value in learning how to calibrate a display yourself? That is a ridiculous statement. Especially coming from someone who owns a projector. You do realize that your projector should be tweaked and re-calibrated every 500 hours or so. Unless you're loaded I don't think you're going to want to spend $300-$500 every six months to have someone come to your house to tweak settings.

Also you clearly have some sort of agenda because you're only person here that is still on about this. There are plenty of well known A/V professionals that have given this device a green light because of how well it performs and how few artifacts it actually creates when used properly. But apparently those reviews are invalid because they aren't by some select few that you deem to be the only word that matters. Those few people you deem experienced enough haven't reviewed it. That doesn't mean they disapprove the device. It means nothing at all.

Also, you make it seem that consumer displays can actually produce a correct image and that by using a Darblet that "perfect" image becomes somehow warped. You can calibrate your projector/HDTV as much as you want but you're never going to get it to perform perfectly. As JoshZ has said about his time with the professional displays he's seen; this device helps to get a calibrated consumer device to look closer to how a professional display looks with the same content. Shouldn't that be what we're striving for? This device makes the image look MORE accurate, not less when compared to a professional display.

You own a JVC projector. I'm actually shocked you haven't given one of these a try. Compared to most higher end single chip DLP displays the JVC projectors look particularly soft in comparison. The Darblet would actually help you get closer to the same amount of sharpness a good single chip DLP can offer. The sharpness that you're seeing on your JVC isn't anywhere near the amount of sharpness you should be seeing. The MTF on those JVC units is still quiet a bit behind a good DLP system. The Darblet can help you out with that.

[JSmith]

No, it isn't. Good picture quality = correct picture quality.

Let's say you have a favourite movie and use that to 'calibrate' your tv and get the look you want. Move on to the next movie, and it'll look all different, because the director intended for that movie to look different from your favourite movie. This new movie doesn't look like you want it to. Isn't that horribly annoying?

I don't think that there are many who have actually experienced good, correct picture quality ever said they didn't like it. It usually goes down well, even with those who don't believe that there are standards that you calibrate according to, and such.

"Good picture quality" is a matter of opinion also. You might believe a movie looks good, but someone else may disagree.

What makes your opinion any more important than anyone elses? Arrogance?

[David Susilo]

Just chiming in, correct/incorrect is something that is objective and can not be argued, but good or bad is purely subjective and can't be measured.

[Josh Z]

I haven't seen this device in action in person,

Naiera, this is where your argument should end. You are arguing from a position of 100% ignorance. You embarrass yourself with every word you type on the subject. Your opinion is uninformed. Enough already. If this product doesn't interest you, don't use it. Move on with your life and stop being such a jerk. You have nothing intelligent to say that can further the conversation. Please stop trolling this thread. Thank you.

[JSmith]

I plan on getting one of these now.

[Naiera]

Naiera, this is where your argument should end. You are arguing from a position of 100% ignorance.

No, I'm not. That should be obvious, since I've seen their own examples of what the thing does. Add to that the fact that I'm pretty well versed in the principles of good and correct picture quality, and I can safely say that the Darblee is bad.

The amount of hostility I sense from Darblee supporters seems to indicate that they're not entirely sure they're in the right. I'm sure that the effect the device gets you is impressive in the same way that an oversaturated and artificially sharpness 'enhanced' image is, but we all know that that's not good.

[JSmith]

No, I'm not. That should be obvious, since I've seen their own examples of what the thing does. Add to that the fact that I'm pretty well versed in the principles of good and correct picture quality, and I can safely say that the Darblee is bad.
The amount of hostility I sense from Darblee supporters seems to indicate that they're not entirely sure they're in the right. I'm sure that the effect the device gets you is impressive in the same way that an oversaturated and artificially sharpness 'enhanced' image is, but we all know that that's not good.

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that people are hostile toward you because of your arrogance and your tendency to insult others who do not share your opinion. (opinion = see above in bold)

[The Limey]

No, I'm not. That should be obvious, since I've seen their own examples of what the thing does. Add to that the fact that I'm pretty well versed in the principles of good and correct picture quality, and I can safely say that the Darblee is bad.

The amount of hostility I sense from Darblee supporters seems to indicate that they're not entirely sure they're in the right. I'm sure that the effect the device gets you is impressive in the same way that an oversaturated and artificially sharpness 'enhanced' image is, but we all know that that's not good.

I think hostility is probably the wrong word- irritation is somewhat more accurate.
- Irritation with regards to being lectured by someone who does not appear to know
what they are talking about e.g. the lack of knowledge regarding something as basic
as algorithms and the PQ on their HDTV.

- Irritation with the blanket labeling of the device -

I can safely say that the
Darblee is bad.

Perhaps you would care to quantify that remark with some
detail as to how this sweeping conclusion has been arrived at?

- Irritation that all this slagging off is coming from someone with no hands on
experience of the device whatsoever.


In fact maybe irritation should simply be replaced with DISBELIEF frankly.

[Seegs108]

Add to that the fact that I'm pretty well versed in the principles of good and correct picture quality...

What makes you think that?

[Naiera]

I know I am. I don't think I need to explain that further. Please point out where I am mistaken if you actually have anything other than veiled insults to bring to the discussion.

Irritation with regards to being lectured by someone who does not appear to know
what they are talking about e.g. the lack of knowledge regarding something as basic
as algorithms and the PQ on their HDTV.

I still don't know what you're on about here. I don't need to know about the inner workings of HDTVs to know what constitutes good picture quality, or how to ruin it.