Better colour rendition thanks to the 4th pixel

Andrew Smith · May 30th, 2010, 03:08 AM

Never Twice the Same Colour ? (citation)

Andrew :-)

Simon Wyndham · May 30th, 2010, 05:00 PM

All I care about is the content. Then the tech quality used to record it it (ie does it look "emotionally good"). Then after that whether it is technically good. As a viewer. Not as a tech engineer.

I'd have to see this fourth pixel to be convinced. I'd have to know how it inter relates to the info that is recorded at source. How is it actually helping what has already been recorded?

Ken Hull · June 2nd, 2010, 01:06 PM

My initial reaction was to think a 4-sensor (RGBY) camcorder would be needed to provide content that could take advantage of what an RGBY monitor displays. Otherwise, the extra yellow would be artificial.

But maybe the only reason for RGBY monitors is because of imperfect RGB filters. The red, green, and blue filter materials being used aren't really "pure", and therefore cannot reach every possible visible color.

Jon, is this latter the reason for the yellow pixel? Or, is an RGBY camcorder needed to take full advantage of that 4th color?

Ken

Jon Fairhurst · June 2nd, 2010, 11:58 PM

The 4th pixel allows the Quattron TVs to exceed the ITU Rec. 709 color space. If we were making calibrated production monitors, we could tune it to produce every color that the signal can represent without gaps.

But, we're selling TVs to the general public. So, we've created an algorithm that produces colors beyond Rec. 709. The idea is to represent as many colors from the real world as possible, even if the camera and transmission system can't represent those colors.

If you suspend disbelief for a moment and assume that we've done this perfectly, then this may or may not be what you want. On one hand, it's not exactly the same as the colorist saw in his suite. (Of course, no two monitors match exactly, so nobody gets that anyway. That's why a colorist never works with two monitors!) On the other hand, if you're watching Planet Earth, you don't want to see what they saw in the studio. You want to see what they actually saw in Africa/Antarctica/wherever.

And, who is to say that the director didn't want to push those saturated yellows, golds and cyans a bit hotter? If the colorist pushed those colors all the way to the limit, it's not unlikely that they might have wanted to push them a bit further if they could.

One place where the Quattron approach works well is when watching sports. When the helmets are gold, you really want to see gold, not a watered-down orange/yellow. The Chargers' lightning bolt is really bright yellow. The Dolphins' teal is to the limit in real life.

So, whether or not Sharp's 4th pixel approach is for you depends a bit on philosophy. And keep in mind that we don't push mid and low saturated colors beyond the director's intent. It's not going to make a sepia film bright yellow.

Now, back to that suspension of disbelief. Of course, we can't push the gamut area beyond Rec. 709 without taking some license. So, no, it's not guaranteed to be perfect. That said, there are two things that allows this to work well in the real world... First, the estimates are not far off. I have yet to see a scene where the color looked wrong or fake. We don't make gold stuff yellow or yellow stuff gold. So stuff looks really good to the human eye, whether or not it's measurably perfect. Second, the bit depth of the processing is good enough that those bright, high saturated colors don't look choppy or contoured. To my eye, the images look really smooth and vivid in the saturated areas. By contrast, normal sets sometimes look a bit dull and artificially limited by comparison. The most important aspect is that the processing is smooth and natural, so it never jumps out and looks synthetic. (If I had watched it and saw singing or stray pixels, I'd be quietly reading this thread and staying far away from the "Post" button.)

The Quattron will never appeal to the philosophical purist. If your goal is to buy a perfectly calibrated Rec. 709 post production monitor, this is not the product for you. On the other hand, the product is faithful on lower saturation stuff, so it's not going to turn your historical drama into a cartoon. Yet, on sports and high-saturation nature and science stuff, the colors really pop while maintaining a smooth, organic look.

As an example of a faithful look at moderate saturation, I played our recent short, Twisted Game, on a Quattron a couple days after we rendered the final, and I don't recall a hint of oversaturation in what I saw. It just plain looked good. http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/eos-5d-m...sted-game.html So, in the real world, I don't think this TV will offend a philosophical purist as much as they might expect.

All that said, I would recommend this TV for viewing content, but not for producing it. With audio monitors, if you mix with speakers with strong bass, your mixes will have weak bass. If your speakers have strong highs, your mixes will have weak highs. Similarly, if you do color correction on this TV, you're likely to deliver content where you undersaturate your brightest colors.

In the studio, use flat monitors for clinical accuracy. In the living room, feel free to use "tuned" speakers to deliver big, sparkling sounds at nominal volume levels. Same thing for Quattron TVs: they're designed as end use TVs, not as flat reference monitors.

I hope that helps!

Paul Cronin · June 3rd, 2010, 07:26 AM

Thanks Jon great insight into the product. Also enjoyed your "Twisted Game".

John Mitchell · June 9th, 2010, 08:09 AM

Jon just curious - why this Quattron technology when OLED promises so much more? Real blacks, that is.
Sure at the moment, until they sort out the kinks, it is prohibitively more expensive but at least everyone will be able to see the difference! And no need for special translation etc...

Andrew Smith · June 9th, 2010, 08:35 AM

I suspect that OLED would benefit from a 4th colour pixel just as much as plasma or LED display technology would.

Andrew

Jon Fairhurst · June 9th, 2010, 10:56 AM

Andrew is right. In theory, any display can benefit from a wider color range. It's not mutually exclusive.

Regarding OLED, it's an exciting technology, but it's not competitive in today's TV marketplace in terms of screen size, production volumes and price.

John Mitchell · June 10th, 2010, 01:06 AM

True - but here we are talking about investing money in new tech and with limited resources I'm wondering why pursue something which by all accounts will be a hard sell. It also sounds like expensive technology to implement, but I guess if it gives Sharp an advantage at the retail store it may pay dividends. I understand why 3D would take precedence (easy to market, sexy to consumers) but Quattron seems a bit left field to me. I guess I'll just have to go and see one for myself and see if I can pick the difference...

BTW another thread in this section talks about a new Dupont process for OLED - sounds promising..

Andrew Smith · June 10th, 2010, 03:46 AM

Maybe there is some lateral thinking in their approach. After all, don't we all look across a retail display of screens and look for the one with the best picture and colour? All the other screens may look a bit off by comparison.

If they can get their economy of scale up and make the pricing within cooee of the competition, they may well be on to a winner.

Andrew

Andrew Smith · September 9th, 2010, 01:09 AM

Just spotted this in a catalogue today ... quad-pixel technology is now in stores in Australia.

Andrew

John Mitchell · September 9th, 2010, 01:25 AM

Ha ha - I love the way they try to show the 'difference" between TV screens in an online or printed catalogue.. wow, you can really see the difference!

Andrew Smith · September 9th, 2010, 02:41 AM

I guess that's always been the case for colour TV sets.

At least they are on the ball with showcasing the better rendition of the yellows, as well as telling people they need to come in to the store to see it for themselves.

I for one have decided to make the trip sometime soon to see it for myself. Should be interesting.

Andew

June 2nd, 2010, 01:06 PM	#33
Ken Hull Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 240	4-color camcorder needed? My initial reaction was to think a 4-sensor (RGBY) camcorder would be needed to provide content that could take advantage of what an RGBY monitor displays. Otherwise, the extra yellow would be artificial. But maybe the only reason for RGBY monitors is because of imperfect RGB filters. The red, green, and blue filter materials being used aren't really "pure", and therefore cannot reach every possible visible color. Jon, is this latter the reason for the yellow pixel? Or, is an RGBY camcorder needed to take full advantage of that 4th color? Ken Last edited by Ken Hull; June 2nd, 2010 at 04:15 PM.

June 2nd, 2010, 11:58 PM	#34
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	The 4th pixel allows the Quattron TVs to exceed the ITU Rec. 709 color space. If we were making calibrated production monitors, we could tune it to produce every color that the signal can represent without gaps. But, we're selling TVs to the general public. So, we've created an algorithm that produces colors beyond Rec. 709. The idea is to represent as many colors from the real world as possible, even if the camera and transmission system can't represent those colors. If you suspend disbelief for a moment and assume that we've done this perfectly, then this may or may not be what you want. On one hand, it's not exactly the same as the colorist saw in his suite. (Of course, no two monitors match exactly, so nobody gets that anyway. That's why a colorist never works with two monitors!) On the other hand, if you're watching Planet Earth, you don't want to see what they saw in the studio. You want to see what they actually saw in Africa/Antarctica/wherever. And, who is to say that the director didn't want to push those saturated yellows, golds and cyans a bit hotter? If the colorist pushed those colors all the way to the limit, it's not unlikely that they might have wanted to push them a bit further if they could. One place where the Quattron approach works well is when watching sports. When the helmets are gold, you really want to see gold, not a watered-down orange/yellow. The Chargers' lightning bolt is really bright yellow. The Dolphins' teal is to the limit in real life. So, whether or not Sharp's 4th pixel approach is for you depends a bit on philosophy. And keep in mind that we don't push mid and low saturated colors beyond the director's intent. It's not going to make a sepia film bright yellow. Now, back to that suspension of disbelief. Of course, we can't push the gamut area beyond Rec. 709 without taking some license. So, no, it's not guaranteed to be perfect. That said, there are two things that allows this to work well in the real world... First, the estimates are not far off. I have yet to see a scene where the color looked wrong or fake. We don't make gold stuff yellow or yellow stuff gold. So stuff looks really good to the human eye, whether or not it's measurably perfect. Second, the bit depth of the processing is good enough that those bright, high saturated colors don't look choppy or contoured. To my eye, the images look really smooth and vivid in the saturated areas. By contrast, normal sets sometimes look a bit dull and artificially limited by comparison. The most important aspect is that the processing is smooth and natural, so it never jumps out and looks synthetic. (If I had watched it and saw singing or stray pixels, I'd be quietly reading this thread and staying far away from the "Post" button.) The Quattron will never appeal to the philosophical purist. If your goal is to buy a perfectly calibrated Rec. 709 post production monitor, this is not the product for you. On the other hand, the product is faithful on lower saturation stuff, so it's not going to turn your historical drama into a cartoon. Yet, on sports and high-saturation nature and science stuff, the colors really pop while maintaining a smooth, organic look. As an example of a faithful look at moderate saturation, I played our recent short, Twisted Game, on a Quattron a couple days after we rendered the final, and I don't recall a hint of oversaturation in what I saw. It just plain looked good. http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/eos-5d-m...sted-game.html So, in the real world, I don't think this TV will offend a philosophical purist as much as they might expect. All that said, I would recommend this TV for viewing content, but not for producing it. With audio monitors, if you mix with speakers with strong bass, your mixes will have weak bass. If your speakers have strong highs, your mixes will have weak highs. Similarly, if you do color correction on this TV, you're likely to deliver content where you undersaturate your brightest colors. In the studio, use flat monitors for clinical accuracy. In the living room, feel free to use "tuned" speakers to deliver big, sparkling sounds at nominal volume levels. Same thing for Quattron TVs: they're designed as end use TVs, not as flat reference monitors. I hope that helps! __________________ Jon Fairhurst

June 3rd, 2010, 07:26 AM	#35
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Thanks Jon great insight into the product. Also enjoyed your "Twisted Game". __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

June 9th, 2010, 10:56 AM	#38
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	Andrew is right. In theory, any display can benefit from a wider color range. It's not mutually exclusive. Regarding OLED, it's an exciting technology, but it's not competitive in today's TV marketplace in terms of screen size, production volumes and price. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

September 9th, 2010, 01:09 AM	#41
Andrew Smith Equal Opportunity Offender Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,016	Just spotted this in a catalogue today ... quad-pixel technology is now in stores in Australia. Andrew Attached Thumbnails

May 30th, 2010, 03:08 AM	#31
Andrew Smith Equal Opportunity Offender Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,016	Never Twice the Same Colour ? (citation) Andrew :-)

May 30th, 2010, 05:00 PM	#32
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	All I care about is the content. Then the tech quality used to record it it (ie does it look "emotionally good"). Then after that whether it is technically good. As a viewer. Not as a tech engineer. I'd have to see this fourth pixel to be convinced. I'd have to know how it inter relates to the info that is recorded at source. How is it actually helping what has already been recorded?

June 9th, 2010, 08:09 AM	#36
John Mitchell Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 873	Jon just curious - why this Quattron technology when OLED promises so much more? Real blacks, that is. Sure at the moment, until they sort out the kinks, it is prohibitively more expensive but at least everyone will be able to see the difference! And no need for special translation etc...

June 9th, 2010, 08:35 AM	#37
Andrew Smith Equal Opportunity Offender Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,016	I suspect that OLED would benefit from a 4th colour pixel just as much as plasma or LED display technology would. Andrew

June 10th, 2010, 01:06 AM	#39
John Mitchell Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 873	True - but here we are talking about investing money in new tech and with limited resources I'm wondering why pursue something which by all accounts will be a hard sell. It also sounds like expensive technology to implement, but I guess if it gives Sharp an advantage at the retail store it may pay dividends. I understand why 3D would take precedence (easy to market, sexy to consumers) but Quattron seems a bit left field to me. I guess I'll just have to go and see one for myself and see if I can pick the difference... BTW another thread in this section talks about a new Dupont process for OLED - sounds promising..

June 10th, 2010, 03:46 AM	#40
Andrew Smith Equal Opportunity Offender Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,016	Maybe there is some lateral thinking in their approach. After all, don't we all look across a retail display of screens and look for the one with the best picture and colour? All the other screens may look a bit off by comparison. If they can get their economy of scale up and make the pricing within cooee of the competition, they may well be on to a winner. Andrew

September 9th, 2010, 01:25 AM	#42
John Mitchell Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 873	Ha ha - I love the way they try to show the 'difference" between TV screens in an online or printed catalogue.. wow, you can really see the difference!

September 9th, 2010, 02:41 AM	#43
Andrew Smith Equal Opportunity Offender Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,016	I guess that's always been the case for colour TV sets. At least they are on the ball with showcasing the better rendition of the yellows, as well as telling people they need to come in to the store to see it for themselves. I for one have decided to make the trip sometime soon to see it for myself. Should be interesting. Andew