Samsung TV and HTPC [Archive]

pirlouy

15th December 2013, 17:23

Hello,

I've done some tests I've never really done since I'm rather a casual "plug & play" user. Maybe you're all aware of what is below, maybe you'll learn something but I do not pretend to have a lot of knowledge, it's just information I share.
I have a Samsung LCD TV from 2009 (xxBxxx) but I think the concept is the same for 2013 TVs.

When using good renderer like madVR, you expect your display to let madVR do all images treatment. But unfortunately, there's a good chance your TV does a lot of post-processing stuff which will interfere with what you would have expected.

Indeed, Post-processing is done on all your HDMI entries. There's one exception and you have to respect these conditions:

1) You have to use HDMI 1 (tagged as "DVI") entry. All others have post-processing forced.
2) You have to go to a special menu in your TV to rename this HDMI 1 entry to "PC" or "PC DVI".
3) You have to use 1920x1080 @ 60Hz only. Don't try to use 24 or 50Hz, or you'll have post-processing enabled. I know some of you use 24Hz by habit/reflex, but you have to be aware of that.

If you respect all these conditions, then the display will act as a monitor and you should notice it in menu with a lot of menus "grayed out". The only difference I've noticed with another monitor, it's a BGR one; I think RGB is most common for monitors.

Some settings you'll have to checked if you use this mode: madVR has to be settled in 0-255 color range. Try to disable the maximum of AMD/nVidia options. In your TV menu, you might have a HDMI black level, you have to use "Normal" and not "Low". Try to use test files to verify no calibration error, or even LCD monitor calibration websites.

--

So, what is the best ? TV as a monitor with madVR doing all stuff, or let Samsung does the post-processing ? Good question, and I think it will depend on people.

In my case, I've tried to compare and it seems image quality is better when in "monitor" mode and madVr does everything, but there are so much post-processing options with Samsung (I've tried to disable all but some are always active like the dynamic contrast APL even if you disable "dynamic contrast" in options).
The only drawback I see is the fact it's 60Hz only. With 24 or 25 fps videos I guess it's not the ideal. I've tried to disable "Smooth Motion Frame Rate Conversion" (FRC), and indeed, the first seconds you really notice the 3:2 pulldown, but it's just an habit, after some seconds, your eyes get used to. With FRC enabled, you don't notice it since the beginning, even with 25fps videos, so to me, it looks like TV settled as monitor is the best choice.

About post-processing, if you want to really notice Samsung post-processing, you can use the famous AVS black clipping test file. This file show some bars blinking at the right of the screen. With Samsung post-processing, even if you disable all the possible options, you will see all the screen blinking: just display the Samsung menu and you will notice this very menu blinks too.
There are also some anti-aliasing post-processing always enabled: just open a text file and you will notice it. Of course you'll say it's not important we do not read small text when watching movie, but I guess it can interfere with madshi upscaling algorithms.

I don't know about other brands, but like they often mimic competitors, I would not be surprised if we have the same behavior. It's too bad there's not a 24 or 50Hz monitor mode, but maybe there's a technical reason...

PS: It's strange to sell a "Game Mode" when there's still post-processing slowing down rendering (not good for Online FPS). But I guess the "Game Mode" is here to enable specific algorithms like anti-aliasing which often is the weakness of video cards / consoles.

Sorry for grammar or spelling (PM if something hurts your eyes).

huhn

16th December 2013, 06:16

I don't know about other brands, but like they often mimic competitors, I would not be surprised if we have the same behavior. It's too bad there's not a 24 or 50Hz monitor mode, but maybe there's a technical reason...

just no my "old" Phillips tv build in 2011 week 11 got pc mode for all hdmi inputs and is unlimited rgb 4:4:4. supports 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 50, 59, 60 hz as input without post processing.

i'm pretty sure nearly all newer tv's can do the same.

have you checked your tv i it is a 4:2:2 or 4:2:2 ? http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

my tv is only 4:4:4 in pc mode.

Qaq

16th December 2013, 08:17

I suppose all TV matrixes are x60 (or x50) anyway, so you can't do much there. You only can try to find a lesser evil for the whole setup.

huhn

16th December 2013, 09:20

but they do a pretty nice job on displaying it right.
you can some times read that tvs use 96 hz for 24 mode so not sure...

but there is no real evil anymore

pirlouy

16th December 2013, 12:44

My TV (in monitor mode) is in 4:2:2 according to this image. Is there a setting in madVR to adapt for this case ?
So... It looks like some brands are better when using PC Mode. Do you know some brands who offer a 24Hz through 96Hz ?

huhn

16th December 2013, 13:09

My TV (in monitor mode) is in 4:2:2 according to this image. Is there a setting in madVR to adapt for this case ?
no

all i know is that it works fine with my.

a friend of me has an older Phillips (i was about 3-4 times a expansive as my was) i think from 2008 there is no pc mode but 23 hz was no problem.

23 hz in windows is 24000/1001 nearly all bds are 23 hz not 24 with 24 hz you get a frame drop every ~42 sec.

to be totally honest i haven't seen a tv who can't handle 23 hz today. but a lot can't display 4:4:4.
i don't know what my display did. but some times you can read this "24hz (5:5 pulldown)" all philips have a pc mode you can read about this in the Manuel but new display should do this perfectly too i heared sharp got problems with 4:4:4 i was interested in a Sharp Aquos LC-60LE652E but all i read about it was it can't handle 4:4:4 so i gave up on it.

maco07

16th December 2013, 15:21

I had set my rig on DVI-PC with full RGB 4:4:4 for desktop and gaming and use Autofrequency to play movies in 24Hz mode (to take advantage of anti blur "Clear" mode and local dimming), just with right click, play with Autofrequency. Then autofrequency calls Potplayer.

pirlouy

16th December 2013, 18:39

but all i read about it was it can't handle 4:4:4 so i gave up on it.
Where do you find this kind of information ? It's hard to find useful information in the manual. In general there are only approximations, and no technical details.

For the record, the TV I got is able to display 23,24,25,30,50,59,60 Hz, but not in "monitor" mode and it is what I don't like. But to be honest, I don't see judder with madVR FRC.
For the 4:2:2 thing, I guess it's not really a problem since Blu-Ray are in 4:2:0, but maybe I underestimate this.

huhn

16th December 2013, 19:09

For the 4:2:2 thing, I guess it's not really a problem since Blu-Ray are in 4:2:0, but maybe I underestimate this.

it's not the end of the world but the way a pc works and the way madvr works is the "problem"

if you play a bd in madvrit gets yuv 4:2:0 this is upscailed to 4:4:4 and after resizing and so on dithered to rgb24

but your tv gets a rgb 24 pic and changed this to yuv 4:2:2 again and later to 4:4:4 and rgb again... this is not the best way to do this...

the difference in a pc game is very visible!

Where do you find this kind of information ? It's hard to find useful information in the manual. In general there are only approximations, and no technical details.

i just read about this in a forum. from people who got one.
but a tv with pc mode is way more likely to support 4:4:4 then a tv without. the best way to find a tv with 4:4:4 and unlimited support is to look a round in forums or ask in forums user who got one.

For the record, the TV I got is able to display 23,24,25,30,50,59,60 Hz, but not in "monitor" mode and it is what I don't like. But to be honest, I don't see judder with madVR FRC.

yeah madvr does an awesome job with smooth motion! there is a high chance that tvs do the same like madvr.

pirlouy

16th December 2013, 19:20

but your tv gets a rgb 24 pic and changed this to yuv 4:2:2 again and later to 4:4:4 and rgb again... this is not the best way to do this...
Are there some TV who handle 4:4:4 RGB without this kind of conversion ? Or you have to have a RGB-> YUV-> RGB (without loss if TV handle 4:4:4) ?

(Thank you for all your information)

Asmodian

16th December 2013, 19:48

There are some TVs that do not have any conversions, at least as far as anyone can tell. :p

Not that I am willing to name specific brands & models. ;)

pirlouy

16th December 2013, 23:56

maco07

17th December 2013, 00:04

Please do ! :D
Huhn seems to have a good feeling with Philips TV. It looks to me it is not the same for Samsung (only 1 HDMI able to be used as monitor, and only 60Hz, and maybe 4:2:2 but not confirmed on recent models).

Anyone can test it with a pattern like this:

http://i.imgur.com/gTsKnxk.png

Edit: image link

pirlouy

17th December 2013, 00:21

Edit: thanks maco07
huhn also gave a test image from madshi: http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

In my case, my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.

huhn

17th December 2013, 02:24

Plus huhn also gave a test image from madshi: http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png
thank madshi! by the way it is easy to find:

If you want to test whether your display supports RGB in 4:2:0, 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, you can use this test image. Make sure you display it with 1:1 pixel mapping, otherwise it won't work.

http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1271414&postcount=1

Huhn seems to have a good feeling with Philips TV.
that's way i got this one. but i'm pretty sure this isn't spezial anymore.

but there is also a problem with these tvs all gpu i have ever tested think this display is limited color range. so i need the madNvLevelsTweaker, reg hacks with intel or i have to change this in the gpu driver from amd. if you don't know this you get milk black and bad white.

Qaq

17th December 2013, 07:57

my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.Did you try to set it to PC mode (HDMI input to "PC", but better read the manual)?

huhn

17th December 2013, 11:54

he called that monitor mode so yeah he did that!

hello_hello

17th December 2013, 14:38

I've done some tests I've never really done since I'm rather a casual "plug & play" user. Maybe you're all aware of what is below, maybe you'll learn something but I do not pretend to have a lot of knowledge, it's just information I share.
I have a Samsung LCD TV from 2009 (xxBxxx) but I think the concept is the same for 2013 TVs.

Well thanks for sharing as I've learned something.
My TV's a Samsung Plasma, around 2 years old. The manual does little but state the obvious, and I've always wondered why HDMI 1 is the "PC input", given it never seemed any different to the other HDMI inputs.
I'd already set everything up according to the conditions you listed, but I generally run it at 50Hz (I use Reclock to watch everything at 25fps). So I switched to 60Hz and checked the picture menu, and sure enough.... it looks exactly like the menu when using the VGA input. I think the same menu items are greyed out with the exception black level. The "Movie" picture mode is no longer available, just as it's not when using VGA.

For me, displaying a still picture (especially a lot of white) at 60Hz seems to produce a flicker, similar to CRT refresh rate flicker, I guess. Maybe that's a plasma thing or just my brain. I don't see it at 50Hz.
There does seem to be some post-processing happening at 50Hz.
The anti-aliasing can be seen when viewing text.
The AVS black clipping test file (assuming I found the correct one) doesn't cause any blinking in either TV or monitor mode, but when displaying a window with a white background there's an obvious difference between the two. The TV seems to reduce the brightness according to how much white there is on the screen. That process is very stable in PC mode. In TV mode, often after resizing a window the white background will flash a little before it settles down.
The picture is sharper in TV mode (displaying a still image). I only run the sharpness at 20% anyway, but it surprised me I had to reduce it to 0% before it looked about the same as PC mode (50% sharpness by default).

At least now when (very) occasionally I think I see a bit of a jump in brightness during a static scene I'll know I'm not imaging things.

So can someone tell me..... under advanced picture settings there's a Colour Space option and the choices are "Auto" or "Native".
The TV's "tooltip" describes Auto as "setting the colour range depending on the input source" and Native as "setting a colour range wider than the input video source".
Could someone please tell me what that means?

hello_hello

17th December 2013, 14:40

http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png
In my case, my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.

According to that image, I guess mine is too (HDMI PC mode).

pirlouy

17th December 2013, 19:53

So can someone tell me..... under advanced picture settings there's a Colour Space option and the choices are "Auto" or "Native".
Could someone please tell me what that means?
When I had search the Internet for this, I had not found a lot of information. If I remember well, "Native" is Samsung attempt to have a better display, but often it's not optimum and people recommend "Auto".
If you open Paint, try to display some "known" color (like blue, yellow, red, green) and choose what seems to be the best to your eyes.

When I was using "Native", Yellow was ugly, with "Auto" it was correct to me. But maybe there have been some improvements from Samsung since then.

mark0077

17th December 2013, 20:46

hmm always thought my Samsung Series 9 from 2008 (euro equivalent of LN46A950) was 4:4:4 in 60hz PC Mode that I always use. Testing with patterns from this samsung thread official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1381724/official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread)(and the thread itself) seems to indicate its 4:4:4 but madshis test pattern here lights up really bright 4:2:2

http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

Is the fact that 4:2:2 lights up but I can also clearly see the 4:4:4 (but darker than 4:2:2) an indication of 4:2:2 or 4:4:4?

Regards,
Mark

hello_hello

17th December 2013, 21:20

When I had search the Internet for this, I had not found a lot of information. If I remember well, "Native" is Samsung attempt to have a better display, but often it's not optimum and people recommend "Auto".
If you open Paint, try to display some "known" color (like blue, yellow, red, green) and choose what seems to be the best to your eyes.

When I was using "Native", Yellow was ugly, with "Auto" it was correct to me. But maybe there have been some improvements from Samsung since then.

Ah yes.....

I hadn't thought I could see a difference between them before, but when displaying a large block of colour like that I could. Mainly for red and green, although the difference wasn't huge. For some reason with my TV it seemed to make no difference to yellow.

I went back to displaying a video and had trouble picking a difference between the two settings. In the end I had to pause a cartoon with large blocks of colour to reliably see a change, so I guess for my TV the difference is fairly subtle, but "auto" seemed to be correct.... I think.

Thanks.

Asmodian

17th December 2013, 22:42

Is the fact that 4:2:2 lights up but I can also clearly see the 4:4:4 (but darker than 4:2:2) an indication of 4:2:2 or 4:4:4?

It should look similar to the way it does on a PC monitor or smart phone/tablet (view it at 1:1 of course). At 4:4:4 you can see the 4:2:2 but it looks "liney" and is faint. The 4:4:4 is almost invisible on a non-4:4:4 display.

Dallen

17th December 2013, 23:27

Whats up with these random questions? Does ANYONE know the answer to them?

My PS64E8005 supports 4:4:4 in PC mode.
One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?

hello_hello

17th December 2013, 23:28

maco07

18th December 2013, 16:18

pirlouy

18th December 2013, 19:27

One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?
If you use LAV filters default settings, you won't lose anything. But there's a good chance your source is not 4:4:4 so it's not a problem.

The only drawback of not having 4:4:4 when watching videos, it's the fact you won't benefit from madVR chroma upscaling (if I don't say bullshit) but it's really not important I think, compared to the quality of your source file.

It's different for judder which can be noticed more easily. It will always be better to have a display which can use 23,24,25,30 multiple display refresh rate.

Asmodian

18th December 2013, 20:34

The only drawback of not having 4:4:4 when watching videos, it's the fact you won't benefit from madVR chroma upscaling (if I don't say bullshit) but it's really not important I think, compared to the quality of your source file.

I do not agree. madVR gives you close to optimal RGB (with user control over the conversion and dithering). If you let the TV do a RGB -> YUV (4:2:2) -> RGB conversion after that you lose much of the benefit of using madVR in the first place, Jinc resize would certainly be a waste. :(

My PS64E8005 supports 4:4:4 in PC mode.
One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?

It is true you do not need to set 4:4:4 in LAV for 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 sources, leave the scaling to madVR. You do need to make sure the video card is sending RGB to the TV and the TV is in a mode which does not have an internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2.

It's different for judder which can be noticed more easily. It will always be better to have a display which can use 23,24,25,30 multiple display refresh rate.

Sorry but I disagree here too. :)
If your video card can do it madVR's smooth motion works very well and allows the use of a 60 Hz RGB mode (PC mode) with better overall quality than the same TV in a YUV 4:2:2 23/24 Hz mode. In my opinion, of course. ;)

JanWillem32

18th December 2013, 20:43

I mostly agree with Asmodian. Many make the thinking error of that rendering of 4:2:0 video happens in some 4:2:0 color space/format. It does not. To be able to properly render something at all, you have to get rid of chroma down-sampling and the mess that is Y'CbCr in one of the first steps of a filtering chain. After rendering is all done, reverting to 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 will have the usual downgrade of quality. On top of that, the usual processing in the hardware happens inside the usual 8-bit integer {[16, 235], [16, 240], [16, 240]} intervals, which is extremely poor. Banding is a very common consequence. (Note that the 10-bit format for Y'CbCr isn't that much better either.)
Eliminating artifacts by simply disabling any digital processing done after the renderer should be a lot easier... It unfortunately seems to be different on far too many consumer display devices and graphics adapters. It's also nasty that on many devices that you're so limited in the available refresh rates. Even CRTs from decades ago could just accept a decent range of input refresh rates (often genlocked, but that's okay).
Changing the filter that does chroma up-sampling (in this case from madVR to LAV filters) does not help at all with the matter at hand here. The issue is purely in the steps after the video renderer up to the viewed output.

pirlouy

18th December 2013, 20:44

Is there a way (setting) to tell madVR to upscale to 4:2:2 instead of 4:4:4 ?
Is it possible the GPU card is the one responsible of 4:2:2 conversion (instead of display) ?

Asmodian

18th December 2013, 23:04

madVR renders in RGB which by definition does not and cannot have subsampled color. RGB is also the native format of nearly all displays, though some are BGR or RGBY.

It is easy to have the video card convert to YUV 4:2:2 when using HDMI out; the drivers should have the option to send YUV 4:2:2, YUV 4:4:4, or RGB. When using madVR RGB is the correct setting.

pirlouy

18th December 2013, 23:40

Ahh... I've checked again, and when in monitor mode, I'm in 4:4:4 actually.
I guess I was not in 60Hz when I checked the other day. :/

hello_hello

19th December 2013, 02:13

Ahh... I've checked again, and when in monitor mode, I'm in 4:4:4 actually.
I guess I was not in 60Hz when I checked the other day. :/

Ditto for me too. I checked again and I guess I wasn't in 60hz mode when I checked the first time either.

So what's happening when it's not in monitor mode and it's 4:2:2?
I assume that means the TV is internally converting it to YUV 4:2:2, but I don't quite understand why it does that.

JanWillem32

19th December 2013, 05:49

So what's happening when it's not in monitor mode and it's 4:2:2?
I assume that means the TV is internally converting it to YUV 4:2:2, but I don't quite understand why it does that.Most video processing hardware is really poor quality. Down-grading the input to Y'CbCr 4:2:2 and such to be able to do processing is a common thing.

Asmodian

19th December 2013, 08:12

I believe it is a memory bandwidth limitation, 4:2:2 needs 2/3 the bandwidth and buffer sizes of 4:4:4 for the sharpening etc. chip. :p

JanWillem32

19th December 2013, 08:24

It depends, 8-bit 4:2:2 uses 16 bits per pixel, 8-bit 4:4:4 takes 24 bits per pixel, 12-bit 4:2:2 uses 24 bits per pixel, 12-bit 4:4:4 takes 36. The highest (but still reasonable) consumption of memory would be single precision floating-point, taking 96 or 128 bits per pixel (depending on alpha/extra channel) for 4:4:4.
Note that 4:4:4 forms can differ, too. There's not just Y'CbCr, R'G'B', RGB and such. There are even more complicated color formats available to get a better color model of world-to-human vision.

leeperry

19th December 2013, 18:17

Dallen

19th December 2013, 18:20

Thanks guys.

I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?
Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?

When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.
The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".

And for Nvidia users, adding a custom resolution of 61Hz for eg. makes your graphics card output 0-255.
I can even add a custom resolution of 75Hz on my TV, but that disables sound over HDMI when playing a movie :(

I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.

Asmodian

19th December 2013, 19:27

And +90% of those TV's are used to exclusively watch 4:2:0 DVB-T/DVD/BD, so why would they care about 4:4:4 processing in the first place? Would people be willing to pay extra for this in your opinion? ;)

It is most significant for console or computer gaming. As of now I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market, especially with new ones out. :)

I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?
Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?

When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.

Yes, this is the mode we are talking about. :)

The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".

Right, those are done by the processor that can only handle 4:2:2.

I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.

Yes it does, 25Hz content looks very smooth and sharp on a 120Hz display with madVR's smooth motion on. The blended frames are only displayed for 8.33 ms.

leeperry

19th December 2013, 19:44

I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market
The only thing gamers care about is input lag, not gonna happen IMO.

nevcairiel

19th December 2013, 20:03

Yeah the PC or Game mode is specifically for gamers, not only to allow 4:4:4, but also to reduce display latency.
Games also don't really need the film processing, since its already 4:4:4 and hopefully free of artifacts.

JanWillem32

19th December 2013, 20:16

And +90% of those TV's are used to exclusively watch 4:2:0 DVB-T/DVD/BD, so why would they care about 4:4:4 processing in the first place? Would people be willing to pay extra for this in your opinion? ;)input != output
Raw Y'CbCr isn't pretty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YCbCr (and even those pictures are modified). You need some processing to get Y'CbCr on screen as R'G'B'. If that processing isn't decent (the usual case) the output quality will be bad.
No analog nor digital video cable format even supports the transport of Y'CbCr 4:2:0 at all to begin with. You either need to up-sample to a half-baked Y'CbCr 4:2:2 signal, or to one of the more decent formats. I don't know why on earth people ever allowed Y'CbCr formats on the digital video cable formats to begin with. The currently available ones (DVI, HDMI, DP, SDI) are required to support common R'G'B'(-like) signals anyway. (DL-SDI, DP and HDMI are also used to transport the XYZ signals in DC systems.)
I've said this before, but the 80's TV set I was allowed to play with back when I was still a young tech enthusiast had pretty much ideal control when you plugged in a VGA connector. It looked like what you expect from a CRT TV from the 80's, but it hardly was fussy at all about refresh rates and didn't have any silly digital hardware to do obnoxious filtering with forced chroma down-sampling.
In yet another era, I had to deal with PC's that could only process 15- or 16-bit color palettes. (Of course I'm old enough to have met 8-bit grayscale and color palettes, but I never really used them much.) Programming and designing for these was nasty. You're always pushing pixels and then take a look if it's looking decent on screen... In all my years of developing I never had to deal with 'hidden' filters after the processing chains I wrote, except for some analog 'knobs' on the display device.
It has only been the last few years that the digital era for video and imaging became common. Everything on a true professional-grade level, from various studio software, to the digital hardware used for cinemas for example, worked out very well. On the other hand, consumer devices seem to be forever stuck in the digital dark ages.I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?Test it yourself. I know what 'enhancement' filters the video chips on consumer devices can do these days, and I'm much underwhelmed.Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?To disable post-processing; force full-range R'G'B' input from the PC/other device of choice, prevent backwards transforms to some sort of Y'CbCr format and back to R'G'B' for the display panel again, and only use the analog controls of the display device. Two chroma testing images were posted already to see if you're in some sort of Y'CbCr 4:2:2 mode or are passing '4:4:4' through normally. I personally used the Nokia monitor test a lot in the past. That one's nice for various test screens as well.When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.
The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".By all means, leave video/film effects to your video renderer of choice. It doesn't seem that the usual text on your desktop benefits from such artificial enhancements anyway. (I'm really not surprised...)And for Nvidia users, adding a custom resolution of 61Hz for eg. makes your graphics card output 0-255.
I can even add a custom resolution of 75Hz on my TV, but that disables sound over HDMI when playing a movie :(If the video output stays working, by all means send a problem report to Nvidia to fix the audio when using such custom refresh rate settings.I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.Correct, the less amount of time movement artifacts can stay on screen (caused by a higher output frame rate), the better. It makes them less visible. Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate, but a somewhat higher sensitivity to 'raw' motion.As of now I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market, especially with new ones out. :)8-bit video processing is really crappy. Even if it's 8-bit R'G'B'. Please don't bring any funny ideas to the hardware manufacturers :D.

*Again, I agree on most points with Asmodian.

Asmodian

19th December 2013, 21:49

8-bit video processing is really crappy. Even if it's 8-bit R'G'B'. Please don't bring any funny ideas to the hardware manufacturers :D.

Are these 4:2:2 video processing chips really using >8 bit? If so, I agree; going to 8 bit RGB would probably be a bad idea. Let me say RGB at the same bit depth then. :)

huhn

19th December 2013, 22:20

Given we're talking about TV modes and refresh rates etc, I have a question someone may know the answer to. It's always bugged me....

Why (I'm running XP) are the lower refresh rates labelled as "interlaced" in Windows Display Properties when it appears they're progressive? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2wew6di.gif

xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hz

Correct, the less amount of time movement artifacts can stay on screen (caused by a higher output frame rate), the better. It makes them less visible. Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate, but a somewhat higher sensitivity to 'raw' motion.

but why does 120 hz gaming feel and look better than 60 hz if the human eye is limited to 23-24 ?

JanWillem32

19th December 2013, 23:09

Are these 4:2:2 video processing chips really using >8 bit? If so, I agree; going to 8 bit RGB would probably be a bad idea. Let me say RGB at the same bit depth then. :)Good quantization (meaning bits per sub-pixel) from source to view, a good color space for each applied filter and good methods for each filter is the key to get good video processing. All three of these points are a problem with consumer devices at the moment.xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hzIt's not exactly because of Windows XP. You probably need to add a manual resolution & refresh rate mode if you want to use a custom one. Windows XP and its driver model are not the best at detecting these things.but why does 120 hz gaming feel and look better than 60 hz if the human eye is limited to 23-24 ?It's just like I noted. You can see some fast motion, but you can't get a full 'image' of these in your mind if it's only there for a short time. Think about a whip in action. You can see the motion, but not the exact location and form of the object.

pirlouy

19th December 2013, 23:11

I think this webpage (http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm) can bring answers too.

leeperry

19th December 2013, 23:14

input != output
Raw Y'CbCr isn't pretty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YCbCr (and even those pictures are modified). You need some processing to get Y'CbCr on screen as R'G'B'. If that processing isn't decent (the usual case) the output quality will be bad.
No analog nor digital video cable format even supports the transport of Y'CbCr 4:2:0 at all to begin with. You either need to up-sample to a half-baked Y'CbCr 4:2:2 signal, or to one of the more decent formats.
They actually broadcast low bitrate 1080i around here and it would appear to be 4:2:0 : http://www.hdtv.biz/hdtv_information.shtml
HD broadcasts use 4:2:0 and 8-bit quantization to save bandwidth

so it takes a lot of work to turn it into 4:4:4 RGB 1080p indeed, and yes I get your point that sloppy deinterlacing then chroma upsample all done in 8bit won't look all that great in the end....but movies suffer from the PALspeedup chipmunkiness around here, so this is not the worst offender by far and I couldn't care less about chroma upsampling when I watch the news(well except if it makes huge red blocks :D)

Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate.
FWIR it takes roughly 72fps to completely fool the human brain(fairly easy to achieve with sped up 59.94fps using Reclock) and some fighter pilots can see up to 100fps.

JanWillem32

20th December 2013, 00:16

8-bit 4:2:0 1080i broadcasts are indeed possible. Those are encoded formats. The raw video formats that can be carried by digital video cable formats available for consumers (DVI, HDMI, DP, SDI) are R'G'B'/X'Y'Z', and in some cases Y'CbCr signals in 4:2:2 and 4:4:4. There are none that can carry 4:2:0. (*Available bitdepths for these formats also vary per type of connection.)

nevcairiel

20th December 2013, 08:46

There are none that can carry 4:2:0.

HDMI 2.0 adds support for 4:2:0

hello_hello

20th December 2013, 12:41

xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hz

The 24, 25 and 30Hz refresh rates definitely work. The TV displays the appropriate refresh rate when selecting one, but I don't understand why Display Properties labels them as interlaced.
Not that it really matters.... it's just bugged me not knowing why.

Asmodian

20th December 2013, 19:39

Maybe they really are interlaced and you TV does automatic deinterlacing?

I know when I used interlaced refresh rates in the past they were really interlaced.

JanWillem32

20th December 2013, 22:53

The options in that drop-down menu are just labels. The actual refresh rates are determined by the graphics adapter's driver. It is possible to link such labels to refresh rates not even close to the label's number. I don't know where the "(interlaced)" labels come from. The system-to-driver interfaces do not allow setting that specific property at all under Windows XP. Actually, Windows XP is really bad at communicating information about refresh rates through normal system calls to begin with. The only way for a program to find out the current display refresh rate for instance, is by actively tracking VBlank intervals, or ask the monitor/graphics adapter's driver through a vendor-specific driver interface call.

leeperry

20th December 2013, 23:28

Yeah, Vista came with Aero for a good reason.....XP is either technically obsolete or drivers for new gear barely work, if at all. Intel didn't release USB3 drivers for XP because it's just not worth their time to reinvent the wheel, luckily NEC's USB3 drivers appear to work fine but they come with a resident app that takes over.

TBH it's a miracle that mVR works on XP, all other VR's fail IME due to the VSYNC flip time problem Jan just explained and also the lack of a proper timer source(HPET and later Invariant TSC came to the rescue).

Anyway my point was that +90% of TV's are used to watch low bitrate 4:2:0 HDTV, nobody is willing to pay for TOTL post-processing and especially the R&D that would be required. There's always a low input lag 4:4:4 mode for gamers that will disable the 4:2:2 pp, that's it.

It's interesting to see that Eizo recently released a computer monitor that runs a 120Hz 5K:1 UV²A panel that's able to process 240Hz BFI in 4:4:4(and not 4:2:2 like Sammy TV's) but yeah, 500€ for 24" :D

hello_hello

21st December 2013, 01:06

XP is fine here. I've not had any driver problems yet, even when installing the NEC/Renesas USB3 drivers.
The refresh rates marked as interlaced work fine, I just don't know why they're labelled as interlaced. They're only labelled that way in Windows display properties, not the Nvidia control panel. If I select a refresh rate such as 24Hz, the TV displays 24Hz as the refresh rate. Reclock seems to agree.

Then again, I've never understood why Reclock seems to label all video as interlaced either (ie 720x400i), assuming that's what the "i" means.

leeperry

21st December 2013, 02:12

It's a known cosmetic bug in Reclock IIRC, this piece of software is full of cosmetic "glitches" that James can't be hassled to address. It even lies on the actual resampled rate, which is the opposite of what it shows(48048>47952).

The GTX600 serie is no workee on XP with mVR(or any other VR for that matter) IME and the HD87xx drivers come with their own bag of non-blocking -yet annoying- bugs, also the new rendering path of mVR has always been a no-go on XP IME so yes it does take quite a lot of luck to run mVR with XP on recent hardware. And forget about DXVA2 CP while you're at it.

madshi was also clear that XP acts as a bottleneck when using mVR due to its sloppy presentation, I guess he'd know ;)

leeperry

22nd December 2013, 18:37

BTW, there's a major catch with disabling the built-in 4:2:2 pp on those cheapo Sammy TV's: http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsung-ue55f8000-201303212755.htm?page=Performance

the Samsung UE55F8000 can show all 1080 lines in a scrolling resolution test chart, provided that the [Motion Plus] system is engaged. With this feature off, you’ll see the usual LCD motion performance, which delivers just 300 lines worth of clear details. That’s enough for 24fps movies to appear without much in the way of discernable blur, but fast, high motion content like televised sports will still appear with some.

No BFI/FI, no 1080p motion when you force them into 4:4:4 PC mode.

And as much as Sharp lead the VA market with their 5K:1 UV²A panels, AUO very much lag behind...their newest A-MVA revision trades CR for response time (http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040185432&postcount=236), the GW2760HS being the perfect example: black is light gray at 0.06 but response time is very good compared to their older panels(including my current Sammy TV that runs an AUO panel as proven by its factory menu).

Manufacturers don't have much time left before OLED will take over and most ppl don't care about CR(otherwise LG wouldn't sell so well) so I guess Sharp aren't too willing to drop the prices of their UV²A panels.

pirlouy

22nd December 2013, 21:34

Wow... So much abbreviations ! :D

I'm not sure to see a problem. We don't need Samsung "BFI/FI" for Motion since madVR has this FRC feature.

leeperry

22nd December 2013, 21:46

You need Black Frames Insertion(Sammy's "LED Clear Motion") to get 1080p, mVR's FRC will only add blur on top of blur (http://forum.videohelp.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2572&d=1306421480) if you run the TV in 4:4:4 mode.

Also, the PC mode reverts to their "native" gamut that's not nearly as good as when it's set to "auto".

No free lunch to be had I'm afraid, either you get Jinc3 AR chroma from mVR or 1080p motion.

Same story with that Eizo I mentioned earlier: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/eizo_fg2421.htm
When switching Turbo 240 on there was a significant improvement in the clarity of the moving image. [..] The moving object is noticeably sharper and easier to track across the screen with the eye. It appears sharper and nearly all the motion blur you saw before is eliminated.
Of course it does work in 4:4:4, and it'd better for the price ^^

It should also be noted that in the F5000 serie you get BFI but in the 6+ you are forced to enable FI to get BFI, and their FI hiccups on 24p input..

You might find that review (http://www.hdfever.fr/2012/07/23/test-samsung-ue55es8000/#postTabs_ul_30976) interesting:
Gamut: Auto mode offers more natural colors than Native mode which displays oversaturated colors.

pirlouy

22nd December 2013, 22:53

Ah Leeperry and his eternal research for perfection ! :D
Again, thank you for sharing your links/knowledge.

How do you know this FI is not active only in Samsung F5xxx series and not 6xxx+ etc ? Anyway I guess if you want this BFI you'll have to quit the "PC mode".
A bit off-topic right now, but it was mentioned earlier, the "Game Mode" offered by Samsung does not disable post-processing (4:2:2 conversion etc.). It just enables different post-processing (improving image quality ? anti-aliasing ? Or less CPU algorithms for input lag ? I don't know).
FYI, maybe my menu is lying, but when in "monitor mode", the color space is grayed out on "Auto".

For the BFI, my TV does not have any FI/BFI at all so I don't lose anything. But I have my doubts about this BFI interest (in your Eizo test, it has some drawbacks too). Nothing can really fight against pixel persistence. We just need a new technology with no image persistence... (praying OLED :p)

leeperry

23rd December 2013, 02:34

Which exact model do you have? Sammy call BFI "LED Clear Motion" and FI "Motion Plus". In the 2002 ES series you could toggle them separately but in the 2003 F series, only the 5xxx will allow you to enable BFI without funky FI on top of it.

It's really simple, either you get 1080p motion by enabling 4:2:2 BFI or you get a 4:4:4 blurry mess....pick your poison :devil:

Sammy TV's got two different modes, one is called "game" and the other "PC", only the latter allows full chroma input.

pirlouy

23rd December 2013, 12:49

Ola... LED is not even present in my TV. :)
I have the model named 40B530 (from 2009) so no choice ! :D

Anyway I would pick 4:4:4 at 60Hz anyway. I can live without BFI.
In my model, there's only a game mode, no "PC" mode. You have to rename an entry in "PC" or "PC DVI" and use the HDMI 1 entry.

leeperry

23rd December 2013, 15:29

Oh, I guess CCFL would be too slow for strobing but on their LED TV's the price to pay for full chroma is blurry movements.

huhn

24th December 2013, 16:07

i would love a tv with bfi or something similar and 4:4:4 doesn't sound that hard to make real if you ask me

leeperry

24th December 2013, 20:49

Most TV's come with BFI these days but some manufacturers master it (much) better than others IME.

The point is not whether 4:4:4 BFI would be challenging, especially as it's often only making the backlight strobe.....it's just that Sammy don't allow it if you activate the low input lag "game" mode or the 4:4:4 PC mode.

Only OCD'ed computer users care about 4:4:4 BFI, so this niche markets calls for overpriced products from companies such as EIZO.

The nice added value of enabling the 4:2:2 post-processing on those Sammy's is that you benefit from BFI, DNIE (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1600258&postcount=15433), REC709'ish gamut, 24/50Hz support, etc etc....I've tried really hard to keep it hardcore 4:4:4 but it's 60Hz-only and the ghosting from mVR's FRC (http://forum.videohelp.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2572&d=1306421480) on top of the TV ghosting are quite unbearable tbh, it's blurryland whenever something moves basically. The LCD technology requires BFI by design IMHO, at least BenQ says so: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/content/benq_fp241w_3.htm
By inserting a black frame every few frames, the technology helps 'clean' the human eye of moving images and in real terms, is designed to improve perceived responsiveness. This process artificially helps cloak the ghosting artefacts from the moving image and the human visual system automatically combines the inserted black frame with the image either side of it.
BenQ is owned by AUO, one of the biggest LCD manufacturers behind LG and prolly Sammy.

Asmodian

25th December 2013, 07:47

Only OCD'ed computer users care about 4:4:4 BFI, so this niche markets calls for overpriced products from companies such as EIZO

Wouldn't console gamers want 4:4:4 with BFI too? Low motion blur without chroma blur sounds good to me, does the BFI add input lag? I would think not as it should be strobing the backlight and not doing other PP. LCDs seem to need BFI for any type of content to have low motion blur.

But I do appear to fall into the "OCD'ed computer user" category. :p

nevcairiel

25th December 2013, 11:29

Console games are typically 60Hz to begin with, the blur is much less severe there as it is, so its not really all that important for gaming.
With movies its so bad because the movie footage itself already has motion blur, and the LCD blur adds on top of that.

leeperry

25th December 2013, 18:22

AFAIK The sole and only official reason (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1381724/official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread/0_100) why there is a 4:4:4 PC mode in most modern flat screens is that font rendering suffers a lot in 4:2:2 (http://s807.photobucket.com/user/floatpoo/media/444_faq/test2_a.png.html?sort=3&o=17).

This said, maybe some ClearType finetuning might come to the rescue.

OTOH, not even picture files show obvious differences as it would appear (http://s807.photobucket.com/user/floatpoo/media/444_faq/test2_b.png.html).

It took decades of R&D to TV manufacturers to polish their 4:2:2 post-processing and 4:4:4 chroma for movies might not matter all that much when it was 4:2:0 in the first place..not even mVR can magically create data that didn't exist in the first place.

pirlouy

25th December 2013, 20:20

So in fact, Chroma upscaling from madVR is not that important to you ? And finally, you think it's better not to use TV as monitor when watching movie (unlike JanWillem32 or Asmodian in this thread) ?

nevcairiel

25th December 2013, 20:35

Its not that chroma upscaling is not important, some other factors that the 4:2:2 mode gives you might be more important. For movies, many people will be hard-pressed to actually reliably see the difference, especially in motion.
No question there is a huge advantage for PC content, gaming and the like.

There is a reason many people that did extensive testing on the upscaling topic will tell you that Bicubic chroma scaling is all you need, and any "better" algorithms don't really improve anything anymore.
The step from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 is already a huge difference and way more visible then 4:2:2 to 4:4:4. Of course, some people disagree, but we all have our different priorities. :)

leeperry

25th December 2013, 20:43

I'm only saying that there is an existing consensus that it would be next to impossible to DBT differences between mVR's chroma upsampling algorithms on most 4:2:0 video content and that it would take some real-world comparisons between 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 playback before advising that the former is so much better than the latter. Especially when going full chroma with TV's disables all their post-processing such as DNIE/BFI/gamut adjustments and so on. The price to pay is very high and the actual benefit might just not be worth it.

pirlouy

25th December 2013, 21:25

So in the end, you have quite a good opinion of these TV post-processing.
Leeperry, I know you've tried several LCD, do you think there's a brand who does a better job with post-processing ? I think I read once you was quite impressed by this Dnie from Samsung. Is this still actual ? Or have you found major defaults ?

Concerning BFI, do you think it has still an utility with a technology like OLED (with low image persistence) ?

nevcairiel

25th December 2013, 21:59

Concerning BFI, do you think it has still an utility with a technology like OLED (with low image persistence) ?

Image retention/persistence can still be a problem with OLED, since both OLED and LCD are inherently sample-and-hold displays, which causes image retention in your eye.

The big advantage with OLED (and some LED LCD displays today, especially Sony Crystal LED display) is that you have much better control about the actual light coming off each pixel, so you can turn the light off much better to avoid these issues, but its not magically solved just by the tech itself.

leeperry

26th December 2013, 03:30

OLED is still at the late prototype stage at this point, both korean manufacturers are still trying their luck handling the problem with blue subpixels and the chinese haven't jumped on the bandwagon just yet (http://www.digitalversus.com/tv-television/tcl-invests-2-5-billion-new-oled-factory-n31593.html).

By the time we can get sub-1K€ >=32" OLED's, all this will have more than likely settled down and drastically improved.

The problem with Sammy TV's is the panel and backlight homogeneity lotteries, you have to check the former in the factory menu and the latter in a pitch black room.....it took me literally a dozen attempts to finally locate a 3500:1 CR 0.04 cd/m² black AUO Sammy TV with bearable vertical banding. The amount of energy and perseverance required were entirely worth it but all in all this was a highly frustrating experience and I would think twice before going through it all over again.

If I were you, I would try to locally demo a Panasonic plasma and score one for cheap as these will be reaching EOL soon and there are sellers trying to get rid of them while they still can: http://www.dealabs.com/search/?q=panasonic+plasma ;)

pirlouy

26th December 2013, 18:59

Thanks you both for all these info.

I'm not into plasma. Too heavy (strange argument I know). I'm ok with my actual TV, considering some years ago, I was watching movies with VMR-9... It helps me not to fall in the perfection illness. :D

If I had to change I'd prefer to go with a bigger TV (50+) instead of a better image.

Qaq

27th December 2013, 07:14

nevcairiel

27th December 2013, 08:53

I agree that TVs are not perfect with RGB. Thats why I said few times in madVR's thread that I'd be happy to see HDCP protected YCbCr output (422 or 444 optional). Not sure though madVR is able to process everything in YCbCr.

GPUs are pretty much incapable of direct YCbCr output.
You'll have one RGB step in between, which defeats the entire purpose.

pirlouy

27th December 2013, 20:18

I've done some tests: I've chosen a video, paused on an image, and compared "Monitor mode" and "Samsung Post-processing mode". And indeed, image by Samsung with PP is better. I guess it would be possible to do the same with some shaders. I think it's just a modification of original image to "look" better, but it works.
So in the end, I think it's better not to change original image and let the TV do the PP. For now I let the TV handle the 24fps instead of using madVR FRC.
Maybe Samsung PP has better upscaling algorithms than those from Madshi ? Are there some comparative between both ? Or it's not even debatable and I'm way too confident about my TV ? :confused:

leeperry

27th December 2013, 20:51

mVR's goal is to output the best looking "true to the source" PQ, DNIE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppKDqer2zs8)'s job is to overcome the very limitations of the TV(poor black level, poor native CR and ghosting)....disable the latter and experience the consequences.

It should also be noted that even 10yo projectors worked in 10/12bit so you can rest assured that DNIE works in at least 10 and more than likely 12bit ;)

Just for fun, here's a comparison between the 8bit Sanyo PLV-Z2 and the 10bit Z3 (http://www.son-video.com/images/static/Rayons/HomeCinema/VideoProj/Sanyo/PLVZ3_PixelWorks_FX_m.jpg), I owned both simultaneously, compared them using the "300" movie and I can confirm that the Z2 was unbearably snowy. The Z4 went 12bit eventually.

Qaq

30th December 2013, 09:02

GPUs are pretty much incapable of direct YCbCr output.
You'll have one RGB step in between, which defeats the entire purpose.
Just like that? :) Care to provide a bit more details?
I'm only saying that there is an existing consensus that it would be next to impossible to DBT differences between mVR's chroma upsampling algorithms on most 4:2:0 video content and that it would take some real-world comparisons between 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 playback before advising that the former is so much better than the latter. Especially when going full chroma with TV's disables all their post-processing such as DNIE/BFI/gamut adjustments and so on. The price to pay is very high and the actual benefit might just not be worth it.
This guy thinks different: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1505166/do-most-tvs-now-support-4-4-4-which-ones-original-thread-not-updated/60#post_24134317
If I use madVR upsampling on my HTPC, it is visibly degraded when I switch my TV to a mode which processes chroma in 4:2:2 rather than 4:4:4, when all else is equal.
This is not a result of image processing, but a result of discarding half the chroma resolution.
leeperry, I guess I've missed something, but how does a colorblind guy may judge about colors at all? Sorry if anything.

leeperry

30th December 2013, 13:54

Sorry
Apologies accepted.

Lemme clear this up once again for ya: with the ES/F LED Sammy TV's, the deal is very simple, it's either blurry 4:4:4 with a wide gamut or BFI 4:2:2 in a REC709 gamut. The LCD technology is worthless without BFI in many ppl's opinion (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/content/benq_fp241w_3.htm).

Subjective impressions are nice and all but they are meaningless without screenshots comparisons and FWIS in the OP of that AVS thread, only computer fonts suffer from 4:2:2.

pirlouy

30th December 2013, 21:29

In fact, it's impossible to compare a TV in 4:2:2 mode and in monitor mode (4:4:4). Even with screenshot, since the post processing is done by TV after Windows output. For real comparison, it would need a fixed camera, and TV should not have any post-processing in 4:2:2 (which is not the case).

IMO, "Chronoptimist" can't say he loses something, it's just post-processing he does not like in its TV.

panetesan2k6

9th January 2014, 10:00

Nice thread, Pirlouy :) I was going to write something of the sort as I've been doing some testing with MadVR and related tools.

I have a Samsung 32" B651 model, but I also tested my grandparents' Samsung 40" EH5300, with same results.

Here are my notes:

About the auto-dimming, I never had it in 'Movie' picture mode. It's the only picture mode not applying it. Have you tried it?

About chroma subsampling: Connecting the PC to the HDMI/DVI input and setting the label PC/DVI PC to enter this "PC mode" still has some post-processing going on that prevent the TV from displaying the picture *exactly* as a PC monitor would. Yes, I see the 4:4:4 but the 4:2:2 is still visible, and doesn't look like it looks in a PC monitor ("liney" and faint). I only got the exact same picture of a PC monitor through the TV by going into the Service Menu, where the TV, it seems, disables almost every postprocessing. You can try yourself and double-check with a fullhd pcmonitor. So, what's going on when we put the TV in PC mode? Does it really go for 4:4:4? Maybe, but there is something else that tampers with the picture.

Also: I connected my laptop to a PC monitor with HDMI and VGA inputs, outputting both VGA and HDMI cloned desktop @1080p and displayed every test that I have switching from input to input. Both pictures looked absolutly the same to the naked eye, even in the sharpness tests. Doing the same thing to the TV got me a much worse picture in the VGA input. Sharpness is awful (try lagom lcd test), with "greenish" blending and chroma seems off, but I think, because of the sharpness being so bad. Maybe the analog to digital conversor in this sets is just cheap, I don't know.

PS: I have yet to test the game mode. I'll report back.

pirlouy

9th January 2014, 12:49

panetesan2k6

9th January 2014, 13:44

My family also have EH5500. And I've noticed indeed when in "Movie" mode, there's not this "CE dimming".
But in my TV, even in "movie" mode, this CE dimming is enabled. The worst part: even in service menu, you can't disable this CE dimming. It is written it is already disable.
I've also noticed this "service menu" is indeed without post-processing (no Ce dimming for example).

For image quality when in 4:4:4 mode, it looks well to me. I don't even notice input lags compared to my 120Hz monitor which let me think there's no post-processing. But I can't say you're wrong, that's quite possible there's still some kind of post-processing even in this mode.

For VGA mode, I have not tested, and don't feel like testing. :/

Thank you for your input and I'll read about your testing in gaming mode. For my TV, there's a bug in Game Mode, some parameters goes crazy and even if you change settings, the next time you restart your TV, settings are lost. I've tried to contact Samsung but without success. But this game mode is not interesting IMO.

Glad you like my comments.

Concerning "Game Mode", I can say for a fact that, on my B651 (didn't test on the EH5300), it's 4:2:2. Quite disappointing...

PS: Regarding VGA testing, there is much controversy about HDMI output. I thought that, if I want to know wether my TV "acts" like a real pc monitor, the best way to find out is to feed it with an unequivocally pc signal through a typical pc input. The only thing that is killing me is a sharpness issue I have that, I think, comes from me trashing some setting in the service menu...

smok3

9th January 2014, 19:14

Not sure what model my Samsung is, but what I noticed is that the TVs internal h.264 decoder is way better than anything I can supply with my mac via hdmi (always getting substantial banding).

p.s. Since i recently upgraded to Mavericks (and Cuda stuff is up to date as well) I may retry the experiment.

leeperry

10th January 2014, 02:11

But the internal decoder is 60Hz-only AFAIK and no Jinc scaling either ^^

On the 2013 F serie, the auto black dimming is inactive in PC mode.

smok3

10th January 2014, 08:57

But the internal decoder is 60Hz-only AFAIK and no Jinc scaling either ^^

I'd notice that, I'am pretty sure screen does frequency switching based on input, although I don't see how is that connected to decoder?

leeperry

10th January 2014, 09:29

well, I mean the built-in player doesn't support 24/50Hz AFAIK.

XMonarchY

3rd February 2014, 19:40

Does anyone have a Samsung TV that ca ndo 4:4:4 (PC Mode) without locking out the CMS adjustment/calibration settings? Every Samsung TV I come about completely ignored manual CMS adjustments in user/service menus and its native factory calibration in 4:4:4 / PC Mode is absolutely horrible - very inaccurate colors, but not as bad as TN panels... It can't even produce very accurate colors when I use ArgyllCMS madVR 3DLUT made from 2527 patches. I'd have to use about 4300+ patches to get to the same accuracy level as 4:2:2 mode and only a 2527 patch 3DLUT. Its the same for CCFL/LED LCD and plasma sets I ever dealt with (and there were quite a few...). It also cannot enter a 48Hz judder-free mode when in PC Mode, while regular mode with 23Hz refresh rate produces some very mild judder, but not enough for madVR to detect and enable Smooth Motion.

4:2:2 mode is a different story - I can adjust CMS and create a 3DLUT on top with exceptionally accurate results. Its also very interesting to note that 4:2:2 Movie mode produces very nasty-looking odd-coloration text, while Standard 4:2:2 mode produces fine and sharp text (almost as good as PC 4:4:4 Mode), even with sharpness set to 0 and edge enhancement turned off completely. Using this test - http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png my TV's Movie 4:2:2 Mode shows "4:2:2" and very obvious edge-discoloration around "4:4:4", while Standard 4:2:2 Mode shows "4:2:2" and "4:4:4" with only a super-tiny & barely-visible edge discoloration, requiring close inspection to even notice!! PC 4:4:4 Mode, however, does not show "4:2:2" at all, but shows "4:4:4" without any discoloration. How is it possible that my Standard 4:2:2 Mode produces barely-visible discoloration around "4:4:4" edges while Movie 4:2:2 Mode shows such an obvious one? Considering this phenomenon, would it be of any noticeable advantage to me to use PC 4:4:4 Mode over Standard 4:2:2 Mode with such a slight discoloration? Whenever I switch between Move 4:2:2 Mode and PC 4:4:4 Mode - I see a big different in text and videos, but when I compare Standard 4:2:2 Mode and PC 4:4:4 Mode - I see little-to-no difference in text and videos from 1-2ft away from the screen with my 20/15 vision. I can also notice a much better image quality when using madVR OpenCL dithering and NNEDI3 for Chroma Upscaling and Image Doubling, features that are supposedly sharpen visuals only for 4:4:4 chroma subsampling modes. I'm not sure what to make of this Standard 4:2:2 Mode that performs so much closer to proper PC 4:4:4 Mode than to Movie 4:2:2 Mode, which, supposedly, is the mode that uses the least amount of processing (yet looks the worst!)... Pseudo-4:4:4 Mode? I used sharpness settings from PC 4:4:4 Mode Service Menu for Standard 4:2:2 Mode Service Menu sharpness settings, which completely eliminated ringing that was present in Standard 4:2:2 Mode originally, even when sharpness was was set to 0 and edge enhancement was disabled in User Menu.

I also enable Game Mode while in Standard 4:2:2 Mode to reduce input lag and some TV video processing. Game Mode input lag is slightly higher than PC 4:4:4 Mode input lag, but much lower than regular Standard and/or Movie modes input lag. Game Mode description states that it may reduce image quality, but I figured that it would not apply to my case since my PC and madVR do the rendering and having a less-processed signal would only benefit the image quality. Game Mode does not influence the "Pseudo-4:4:4" sharpness though.