One thing that might be a part of it is dynamically uncompressed transient response. In other words, complete fidelity of transient response, more accurately than you can see on a scope. Not just in the electronics, but including the speakers and room.
In theory, you might be able to compensate with an expander circuit, the inverse of a compressor. However, you would have to know the required transfer function first, and that would require measurement capability, among other things.
But if going to all that trouble, you would probably also want to control room mode reverberation times too, and not just rely on EQ to smooth out steady-state amplitude response variations.
I had an interesting conversation with a police officer last week. We were discussing shootings. (Bad guy vs good guys)
My training was to fire a quick three shots from a pistol and then quit. His was to fire until the bad guy stopped.
Now for those who follow the New York City shooting news, just about every story has the bad guy injured along with a group of bystanders.
The problem being with the officer's training and under stress the noise never really would indicate when to stop shooting.
Now how many more would like to continue firing complaints?
My training was to fire a quick three shots from a pistol and then quit. His was to fire until the bad guy stopped.
Now for those who follow the New York City shooting news, just about every story has the bad guy injured along with a group of bystanders.
The problem being with the officer's training and under stress the noise never really would indicate when to stop shooting.
Now how many more would like to continue firing complaints?
Bear, all legal colors are defined within a certain color space. Mapping colors from one color space onto another leads to wrongness. Samsung nano screens have a wider color space than that which is used for television. It is like displaying sRGB on an AdobeRGB mapped monitor. Colors get stretched out to illegal values in the original color space.
There may be a setting in the TV to do the mapping correctly, but many users will choose to go for the most impressive picture, real or not.
At least, I have a computer monitor with an expanded color gamut available for use with specialized software, but not intended for default use. My TV is different, and I find the colors look most natural, although a little washed out, when set to video game mode. Since I don't like the more exaggerated color settings, I use that one. Apparently, the design of default TV color performance is strongly influenced by how the picture will look in showroom compared to other TVs, and there is a special setting for that in my TV. It's hard to keep it in that mode though (by design), because it violates the Power Star rating.
Last edited:
Re Edwin H. Land’s “retinex” theory:
http://www.pnas.org/content/80/16/5163.full.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retinex/background/pubabs/papers/icip96_multret.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retine...d Retinex Part 1 Signal Processing Design.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retine...erSurround Retinex Part 2 Surround Design.pdf
George
http://www.pnas.org/content/80/16/5163.full.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retinex/background/pubabs/papers/icip96_multret.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retine...d Retinex Part 1 Signal Processing Design.pdf
https://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retine...erSurround Retinex Part 2 Surround Design.pdf
George
That setting is naff, most TVs are improved by reducing colour saturation, usually the first thing I do, I also use a Gretagmacbeth colour chart to help get the colours as near to correct as possible, easy for my monitors I just create an ICC profile.
Maybe if you want to play back the album in a mastering room and put up a couple of good mics to re-record it. Since much of the music was made inside a box, that would amount to recording the instrument speakers, same as we do with other electrified instruments.
Last edited:
I think there is a device you can buy that you hang over your monitor to calibrate it - uses some software as well.
Getting the colour balance in a picture spot on is no trifling task.
The Pro's also use a white balance card (usually cropped out of course) that is of a known colour/tint. PS, Picasa or whatever then calibrate the rest of the pic based on that known colour.
See Scott Kelby 'The Adobe photoshop CS5 book' for example.
Getting the colour balance in a picture spot on is no trifling task.
The Pro's also use a white balance card (usually cropped out of course) that is of a known colour/tint. PS, Picasa or whatever then calibrate the rest of the pic based on that known colour.
See Scott Kelby 'The Adobe photoshop CS5 book' for example.
I have a cal spider for PC monitors. Not quite worked out a cheap way of calibrating the TV though. Sadly test cards are no longer broadcast. I am sure there must be a method that doesn't cost set up pro $$$.
But like the stereo the household member with full colour vision doesn't seem to care.
But like the stereo the household member with full colour vision doesn't seem to care.
Bear, have you mentioned Land’s presentation for a reason ?
http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/courses/psy236/ColorVision/Land1959.pdf
George
Attachments
Unfortunately it's completely different. As pointed out before, the correct color space "mapping" is done via a setting in the TV firmware (if it has one).
For free, you can try to use a review site that is reputable like rtings.com that actually provides calibrated settings for the TVs they review. Your exact display and conditions won't be identical, but if they have the same LCD or OLED panel you should get closer than unaided fiddling will.
I used to do this as a sideline. The training and equipment were not cheap. The Philips color meter I used cost $6000 back in the 90s. There are better ones now, but they are rather pricey still.
Unlike music production, there are standards for display properties and monitors. They aren't always followed as far as I can see, but a major mastering house will at least try. And TVs have gotten much better over the past 20 years - not just in spacial resolution, but also in color correctness. What hasn't changed a lot is that most people still like an over saturated picture with high black levels. The preference for too much blue is slowly going away.
FWIW, a lot of what makes the color gamut is how the red, green and blue filters are cut. Second is the light source, then how the colors are mapped into RGB. LCD panels have been notorious for bad reds. That is changing for the better.
No it's not "different" - it can not do anything that the source does not already contain. That was my point. No matter what DSP type tricks are played, you can't add information that is not present in the first place. Extracting information that is "buried" or that requires a type of decoding is one thing - but this implies that one could (by way of analogy) take a horrible "loudness war" pop recording and alter it thus becoming essentially similar to a 2 mic (or similar) minimalist recording.
You can map all day, but you're only mapping whatever you have in the first place. Assuming that is correct or "high fidelity" is imho erroneous.
Looks like a market is opening up for "high fidelity video" source material!!
Who's going in with me?
_-_-
- Status
- Not open for further replies.