Samsung UE**JS9000 Owners' thread

You must have a dodgy one then as sharpness should be 0.
Is this something you have tested for yourself and proven to be correct, or have you just read it as a fact, because that is what pro calibrators say the director intended it to be like ?

Some people don't actually like calibrated settings, as it tends to wash the colours out and removes some detail from the picture too.

I have sharpness set to 18 on my JS9000 because when set to 0 the picture is nowhere near as clear.
 
Not been funny or anything, but if sharpness "should be 0" why do we have the option to take it up to 100!.

I'm more than happy with the HD quality of the JS9000 I've had this model for 10 months now and tried all sorts of settings configuration and found that 48 sharpness gives me the best quailty image.

Thanks

Skunk123punk

Explains about sharpness and why it is bad.

Why you need to turn down your TV's sharpness control
 
Perhaps I've got a dodgy panel then, with sharpness down at 0 or 15, it looks like I'm watching it through dirty glass, looses lots of detail, just done a pixel test on my PC through the JS and with the sharpness at 10 looking up close at the screen the pixels within text is not defined, at 48 sharpness, you can clearly see each pixel that makes up the text.

Skunk123punk

You must have a dodgy one then as sharpness should be 0.

LOL! just goes to show how everyone's tastes are different, i don't believe in the keep sharpness at 0 camp, i believe in my eyes however flawed they may be, mine is quite high and i see no artefacts and my image is pin sharp.
 
Is this something you have tested for yourself and proven to be correct, or have you just read it as a fact, because that is what pro calibrators say the director intended it to be like ?

Some people don't actually like calibrated settings, as it tends to wash the colours out and removes some detail from the picture too.

I have sharpness set to 18 on my JS9000 because when set to 0 the picture is nowhere near as clear.

I have tested for myself and my calibrator also set it at 0. Calibrated settings done by a professional do not wash out the colours, if they looked washed out to the viewer then the viewer is used to unnatural over saturated colours and it will take about 5 days for their brain to adapt and they will never go back to oversaturated settings.

Some people want bright popping colours where faces look like they have sunburn and some people want natural life like colours.
 
I'm one of those that likes a little sharpness (I have mine set to 20) as I personally find 0 makes some text a little blurry but whatever suits each person is the right setting as it's all personal preference at the end of the day.
 
I have tested for myself and my calibrator also set it at 0. Calibrated settings done by a professional do not wash out the colours, if they looked washed out to the viewer then the viewer is used to unnatural over saturated colours and it will take about 5 days for their brain to adapt and they will never go back to oversaturated settings.

Some people want bright popping colours where faces look like they have sunburn and some people want natural life like colours.

See this is the problem I have.

When I first got my JS9000 I set it up using the recommended settings on this board, and it did look good.

However.....

Once you switch to UHD colour and use Native, the "recommended " settings just don't do it for me anymore. With custom colour it looks all washed out, and I was using the recommended settings for a few months before I enabled UHD colour and switched to native, so nothing to do with being used to oversaturated settings and needing 5 days to adapt.
 
LOL! just goes to show how everyone's tastes are different, i don't believe in the keep sharpness at 0 camp, i believe in my eyes however flawed they may be, mine is quite high and i see no artefacts and my image is pin sharp.

Yes I totally agree, I didn't pay 2 grand to sit watching a washed out soft image, I've never seen any artifacts with the sharpness up at 48. I use the JS as my main PC screen and that is one quality image, but with the sharpness down low, it's like when you used to turn the contrast right down on old CRT monitors.

Skunk123punk
 
See this is the problem I have.

When I first got my JS9000 I set it up using the recommended settings on this board, and it did look good.

However.....

Once you switch to UHD colour and use Native, the "recommended " settings just don't do it for me anymore. With custom colour it looks all washed out, and I was using the recommended settings for a few months before I enabled UHD colour and switched to native, so nothing to do with being used to oversaturated settings and needing 5 days to adapt.


What are you using UHD colour for and Native? Where has native been recommended apart from watching UHD Blu Rays.

If you are using the custom color from here then every panel is different, so using somebody else calibrated settings colours look awful on your TV. Unless you have calibration equipment then it is only a starting point using settings posted on the Internet.

If you are now saying you have switched to native for all content and like it, then as long as you are happy. But in my eyes I wouldn't particularly want to see neon coloured grass when watching football or when watching a movie everyone looks like they are sunburnt.
 
What are you using UHD colour for and Native? Where has native been recommended apart from watching UHD Blu Rays.

If you are using the custom color from here then every panel is different, so using somebody else calibrated settings colours look awful on your TV. Unless you have calibration equipment then it is only a starting point using settings posted on the Internet.

If you are now saying you have switched to native for all content and like it, then as long as you are happy. But in my eyes I wouldn't particularly want to see neon coloured grass when watching football or when watching a movie everyone looks like they are sunburnt.
I switched to UHD colour and Native as I read that this is the only way HDR content is displayed correctly, and once enabled, I liked the way the picture looked on all sources (I have a 4k sat box connected, which upscales sd and hd to 2160p) so I have left it like that, as when I switched back to custom, it all looked washed out.

My point is, everyone is different and just because someone says "this is how it should be displayed" does not mean that if someone prefers a different look on there tv, then there is a fault with there equipment.
 
I switched to UHD colour and Native as I read that this is the only way HDR content is displayed correctly, and once enabled, I liked the way the picture looked on all sources (I have a 4k sat box connected, which upscales sd and hd to 2160p) so I have left it like that, as when I switched back to custom, it all looked washed out.

My point is, everyone is different and just because someone says "this is how it should be displayed" does not mean that if someone prefers a different look on there tv, then there is a fault with there equipment.

I never said there was a fault lol. Read the previous posts between me and skunk123punk. He said he needed his sharpness really high otherwise his picture was really bad and said he must have a dodgy panel. I asked about the sharpness and said he probably is right about having a dodgy panel. Didn't say he had a dodgy panel because he didn't have the correct settings lol

He was not happy with Sky UHD and said it looked soft, even with sharpness high.
 
You must have a dodgy one then as sharpness should be 0.

I never said there was a fault lol. Read the previous posts between me and skunk123punk. He said he needed his sharpness really high otherwise his picture was really bad and said he must have a dodgy panel. I asked about the sharpness and said he probably is right about having a dodgy panel. Didn't say he had a dodgy panel because he didn't have the correct settings lol

He was not happy with Sky UHD and said it looked soft, even with sharpness high.
Ok I read your post wrong then :)
 
Just because you want/need the sharpness tuned up doesn't necessarily mean you have a defective set or eyes for that matter, its all personal taste, i am sure i and many others have said time and time again, just because some director somewhere decided that his films should be viewed with certain colour/contrast/saturation/sharpness settings doesn't necessary mean it should be an industry standard, therefore AFAIAC i hold a definite middle finger to those industry std recommended/calibrated settings.;):laugh:
 
Custom settings will look washed out on UHD BD as you have to use native to take advantage of the formats wider colour gamut.

I switch to native for UHD and custom for BD as my tv was calibrated for BD at the time, needs a new calibration now though as all my equipment has changed .

Again I only use a little sharpness for Sky HD and game mode. As I find both benifit from a little help. I've put mine up above 30 and it just introduces unwanted artifacts to the picture.
 
IMG_2724.JPG
IMG_2726.JPG
I've got Sky q and watch on standard. I know this is not what the director wants, and some of you are probably having heart attacks right now, but to me it looks so much more impressive. I've tried the settings mentioned a few pages back and they were ok. But Big Cats looked washed out. Switched back to standard and native colour and it blew me away. I think it's all personal preference. I love this TV and after paying £3.5k for a tv, I'll watch it the way I want to. Not what someone else thinks I should be watching it. Look at these pics of monsters inc from 4HD through the sky q box. Looks outstanding to me.
 
View attachment 745238 View attachment 745240 I've got Sky q and watch on standard. I know this is not what the director wants, and some of you are probably having heart attacks right now, but to me it looks so much more impressive. I've tried the settings mentioned a few pages back and they were ok. But Big Cats looked washed out. Switched back to standard and native colour and it blew me away. I think it's all personal preference. I love this TV and after paying £3.5k for a tv, I'll watch it the way I want to. Not what someone else thinks I should be watching it. Look at these pics of monsters inc from 4HD through the sky q box. Looks outstanding to me.

Any chance you can share your settings just to see if other find it more appealing
 
View attachment 745238 View attachment 745240 I've got Sky q and watch on standard. I know this is not what the director wants, and some of you are probably having heart attacks right now, but to me it looks so much more impressive. I've tried the settings mentioned a few pages back and they were ok. But Big Cats looked washed out. Switched back to standard and native colour and it blew me away. I think it's all personal preference. I love this TV and after paying £3.5k for a tv, I'll watch it the way I want to. Not what someone else thinks I should be watching it. Look at these pics of monsters inc from 4HD through the sky q box. Looks outstanding to me.

I use standard also, it looks far more impressive than the washed out, lifeless image from all the calibrated settings I have tried, I know every TV is different but they can't be THAT much different!? You would think between all the settings I have tried, one set must have been close to what my TV would use if calibrated... Anyway, I prefer standard, the picture comes alive and peoples faces do not look sun burnt on my set :smashin:

I also use standard colour temp too, I hate Warm 1 and 2, everything looks yellow/orange :rotfl:
 
Yes I totally agree, I didn't pay 2 grand to sit watching a washed out soft image, I've never seen any artifacts with the sharpness up at 48. I use the JS as my main PC screen and that is one quality image, but with the sharpness down low, it's like when you used to turn the contrast right down on old CRT monitors.

Skunk123punk

I have mine set on 50, Picture looks pin sharp. I once set it to 0 never again looked crap
 
Any chance you can share your settings just to see if other find it more appealing
I'm up early tomorrow so up stairs ready to sleep now. But will post them tomorrow.
 
Personally i also use std colour temp and std picture, all the others just don't look right to me.
 
With regards to certain picture modes I always put on a natural picture ( sport etc ) that I know what it looks like in real life , rather than a film or series. So I'm just gonna put up some pics of the cricket and let you all decide what they look like
20160807_204027.jpg
20160807_204043.jpg
20160807_204055.jpg
20160807_204107.jpg


Although it doesn't show up well in the pics I can assure members that only on my calibrated Movie mode does the umpires trousers remain black and show detail.

This is why one has a tv calibrated , not all this " how the director intended " crap but to show more detail in the light and dark areas of a display.

If I pay 3k for a display then £200 is a pitance to make sure i get the very best from the display .
 
I get what your saying, but if I pay £3k for a TV to look like that, I would be happy personally. I have been to many football stadiums and on a sunny day, the grass looks amazing, a really bright green, It's not everyones cuppa, but from the distance I am from the TV, I wouldn't even make out the umpires trousers anyway, so whether there is detail there is irrelevant to me! Must be my eye sight lol

Anyway, you have given examples of Dynamic (awful setting) and Standard (has it been setup or is it default standard settings?) I use standard but have adjusted all the settings to suite.

Horses for courses and all that, If people want everything to look exactly like it does in real life that is fine, but most blockbuster films are full of CGI these days, what does that look like in real life!? I don't have an abundance of colour in my image, it's on 50 but I use Native and I prefer it over any of the other settings. :smashin:
 
I get what your saying, but if I pay £3k for a TV to look like that, I would be happy personally. I have been to many football stadiums and on a sunny day, the grass looks amazing, a really bright green, It's not everyones cuppa, but from the distance I am from the TV, I wouldn't even make out the umpires trousers anyway, so whether there is detail there is irrelevant to me! Must be my eye sight lol

Anyway, you have given examples of Dynamic (awful setting) and Standard (has it been setup or is it default standard settings?) I use standard but have adjusted all the settings to suite.

Horses for courses and all that, If people want everything to look exactly like it does in real life that is fine, but most blockbuster films are full of CGI these days, what does that look like in real life!? I don't have an abundance of colour in my image, it's on 50 but I use Native and I prefer it over any of the other settings. :smashin:

It's not about real life or natural picture ( although that is my preference ) but optimum contrast and detail in the picture. Spending ££££ on equipment and then not getting the best out of it just seems a little daft to me.

I've seen so so many posts over the years ( even more with the advent of UHD ) bemoaning that this and that looks pants when in fact it's usually down to poor picture settings for display or device.


Each to there own though as we all have different tastes :). But when I read posters views on tv calibration it boggles me somewhat.
 
I can assure you I am not losing much detail, I have played around with so many settings, I look closely at detail in shadows etc. and whilst it might not be scientific in anyway, if my eye's can't see it in the first place, I am not missing out. I have switched between recommended settings from several websites and users from forums, I then switch back to standard and the detail I can see on movie, is there on standard.

I respect people's views who swear by calibrations, optimum picture settings and getting every last drop of detail to show up, not everyone can see the finer details from several feet - I can't, but from several feet I can tell that warm 2, movie mode with 0 sharpness looks awful to my eye's, my refined Standard setting looks great and I am always getting compliments when visitors come round.

These discussions always pop up every now and then, some swear by the calibrated look and others are far happier tweaking the set to look good to them, no one is right or wrong in my opinion :)
 
Its all personal preference and I agree that you should pick the settings to what you want but the thing to remember is are you losing any detail?
Again tho each to their own and if your enjoying your TV, good luck to you.
 
With regards to certain picture modes I always put on a natural picture ( sport etc ) that I know what it looks like in real life , rather than a film or series. So I'm just gonna put up some pics of the cricket and let you all decide what they look like
View attachment 745261 View attachment 745262 View attachment 745263 View attachment 745264

Although it doesn't show up well in the pics I can assure members that only on my calibrated Movie mode does the umpires trousers remain black and show detail.

This is why one has a tv calibrated , not all this " how the director intended " crap but to show more detail in the light and dark areas of a display.

If I pay 3k for a display then £200 is a pitance to make sure i get the very best from the display .

I choose Dynamic. :ducks:
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom