[...]The Art of Home Theater Projectors » Blog Archive » JVC DLA-RS60 Projector – April update, also DLA-HD250Pro[...]…

My screen is a little over 100inch (103) and it has a gain of 1,0. I sit about 3 meters away from the screen, and the JVC has the same distance to the screen.
I do watch 3d movies with the lamp setting on low so that after about 1500 hrs I can switch to the high mode to compensate for the light loss.

My 2D viewing is always on low lamp mode and with the manual iris closed to about halfway so I can open it up more when the lamp starts to dim.
If iI put it on high lamp mode the picture is almost to bright, it will hurt your eyes in very light scenes

I calibrated the picture my self, starting with setups I got from the net, and tweaking from there on. Colors on a X3/RS40 are very red. (65k is more like 5k, 75k is closer to 65k)
After a small calibration I got it pretty good.

My room is a living room with a white ceiling brown walls white doors. So it is no “Bat Cave”.
If I really wanted to improve on the picture quality I have to get a dedicated dark room.

I think the X3/RS40 is so good that I find it hard to justify the price difference between the X3/RS40 and the X7/RS50, X9/RS60. That is why I really hope you can get your hands on a X3 to see for your self.

The 3D here is almost just as bright as my 2D if I put the lamp in high mode.
I did read a review somewhere of the X3 that 3D was a lot brighter than 3D on a Sony VW90ES and has less crosstalk issues.
I have to say that if you do not warm up the X3 for more than 45 min, you can’t watch 3D because of the very heavy crosstalk.
After that (with the right content) there is hardly no crosstalk at all.
It looks a lot brighter and the 3D is stronger then in the commercial cinema.

The X3 is not very good in handling 3D material with frame rate above 24fps.
Witch makes 3D gaming on a X3 not very good.(response time is to slow I think)
2D gaming is excellent.

Thanks for maintaining the best projector review site on the net, keep up the good work.
Greetings from the Netherlands.

Generally those reporting measurements of THX mode, or their own calibrated D65, have been quoting about 600 lumens or a little less. Thus the RS40, based on all of those reports, seems to be measuring about 1/3 brighter than the more expensive models (despite having the same brightness claims).

Now, you have a nice 100″ screen – which is slightly below average for home theater. The sweet spot seems to be between 100 and 110″ diagonal. That was the case when my last company sold home theater projectors – very few screens under 100″, a lot of 100, 106, and 110, and fewer larger…

Now, based on the brightness differences reported, if you switched to an RS50 or RS60 or X7, X9, to maintain the same brightness, you would have to drop your screen size to just under 84 inches to get the same brightness with those more expensive JVCs.

Now I have two screens in use (now) – a 3D silverscreen from Stewart, at 100″ 16:9, and a Stewart Studiotek 130 (gain 1.3), which is 124 diag, but it’s 2.35:1.
When I had the JVC here, I had a 1.4 gain Carada brilliant white screen at 106″ 16:9, on which I did most of the viewing of the JVC. Brightness was never satisfactory in 3D on any screen, at 100″ diagonal. It was just dim. What screen surface are you using? (The gain is obviously important, and you can get the gain you need to make an RS60 bright enough on a 100″ but that much gain pretty much guarantees hot spotting – roll off to the sides…

You mention you even use standard lamp (but you didn’t mention if you are using standard when viewing 3D). BTW, keep in mind that your X3 is pretty new. As with most other projectors, by the time you have say 400 – 600 hours on the lamp, your High lamp mode will only be about as bright as the Standard mode when you first fired up the X3. By the time you hit, say 1500 hours on the 2000 hour lamp, figure you’ll be down 35-40% in brightness.

I mention that because most of us can’t afford to change out lamps every 500 or 1000 hours to keep our brightness up. That too has to be factored in.

Finally, the X3 – RS40, and even the RS50, RS60 and their X versions, are all bright enough to do a 100′ screen in 2D or even fill my old 128″ firehawk or my new Studiotek. 550 – 600 lumens will do that for you.

Brightness of the RS60 is still brighter than the RS2, the least bright of all the RS projectors we measured (3+ years ago). That was the only one not to measure over 500 lumens in D65. So, there’s not a damn thing wrong with the RS50 and RS60 for 2D. Sure we all would have liked the expected 30-40% bump in brightness over the RS25, RS35 projectors, but as I said, a measured 600 lumens is enough for larger screens in 2D never mind a 100″.

But 3D – that’s where the “disaster” lurks. Even with SMPTE setting a standard, it certainly seems their standard for brightness was based on setting a standard that current technology could achieve, rather than a 3D standard that really meets brightness requirements. With no more than 25% of the net brightness of 2D, for 3D, that’s a real problem by my take. I’m not picking on JVC. I simply expect that most of us will want something approaching if not beating getting the equivalent of 8 ft-lamberts of light to our eyeballs, for “adequate” 3D to the eyes. Remember the minimum SMPTE recommendation for 2D is 12 ft-lamberts and 16 is recommended for theaters.

An RS60 that can only do 600 lumens (2D) with a new lamp, on a 100″ screen = 600/30.2 = 19.8 foot lamberts.

Since active glasses solutions for 3D, at best seem to get the equivalent of 25% of the light to your eyes, and most would say 17 – 24%, then our call it 20 ft-lamberts (for a 100 inch diagonal – nevermind people who want larger), works out – to the eyes, of about 5 ft-lambert – with a brand new lamp.

SMPTE set 4.5 ft-lambert as the minimum for 3D, so figure by the time you have a couple hundred hours you are already below the minimum for theaters.

That said, some of the feedback I got from one of the companies that sells lots of digital cinema projectors, was that dissappointing ticket sales for 3D may in part be tied to the feedback – that people going into 3D theaters are often unhappy with the brightness – so not coming back for more. That was the feedback I was given, I have no direct access to theater goer public opinion. Of course I’ll bet a lot of those 3D theaters aren’t even hitting the 4.5 ft-lambert recommendation.

So that’s the story. For many people like myself, who find a 100 inch screen to be on the small side, the hit the lamp brightness will take over time, and other factors, we need to wait for some brighter 3D solutions. My biggest concern is for the RS60. Since it’s $2K more than it’s predecessor, I’m hard pressed to rationalize the extra $2000, for those that will be sufficiently unhappy with the 3D brightness – like myself. With the RS50 who’s price is similar to the older RS25, that’s not an issue. Based on the RS60 I had here, due to brightness, I’d probably buy an older RS35 if still around, and maybe a low cost 720p for now, to fool with 3D…

But, ultimately, it’s about your room, your projector… If you are pleased – just go ahead and enjoy it! If I could lay my hands on an RS40 with its greater reported brightness, I might find that to be enough, maybe. I wasn’t thrilled with the 3D brightness of the Sony VW90ES either, but with about 750 lumens I at least found it to be marginal, and (with a relatively new lamp) adequate brightness on my 3D silver screen, which is brighter (in the center) than my Studiotek 130… (but it rolls off to the sides. -art

So, moving on… regarding the THX, no, I don’t suspect that, since the older RS25 and RS35 also are THX…

from the JVC printed brochure on the X7 and X9 specificatons page
brightness 1,300lm
contrast ratio Native: 50,000:1 and 70,000:1

page 6
The redesigned optical engine utilizes a newly developed 220W ultra-high pressure mercury lamp to achieve a brightness level of 1,300 lumens.

Then they go on about the contrast ratio of the X3.

Do you think certifying it for THX did something to the brightness output?

I think that making a claim like that, but what it really means is “brighter than our previous models … if you calibrate your older model but don’t use any calibration on the newer models” is really going one step too far.