Thanks for these settings!
I know this is an old thread, but I've been scouring the web for settings that reflect accurate colors from a variety of sources, including when I am using my TV hooked up to a computer for photo editing, and these are the first ones I've found that seem to accurately reflect the biases of this set.
To me, it just makes sense to start with a neutral color temperature, as presumably it is neutral, and therefore reflects a balanced mixture of the component colors. I think the Neutral setting only looks cool or blue in comparison to the the Warm 1 and 2 settings as these are obviously intended to present a warmer tone favoring reds, oranges, and yellows, for which you would then have to correct back to some approximation of neutral. Why not just start with neutral to begin with? I've been testing it with a HD television show which includes scenes shot in both more blue-tinged outdoor settings and intimate indoor ones with incandescent light, and both are equally well-represented with your settings. Thanks again. I've tried settings posted by dsskid and a fellow named Will Munshower on different forums and neither were satisfactory. I found with these I inevitably reset to factory settings after a while and it actually improved the image quality. As for eye strain, I could reduce the backlight at certain times, when I'm using the TV as a monitor for extended periods of time. I find the higher setting gives a much wider dynamic range to the content I was testing, where with lower brightness and backlight, all detail is lost from dark areas of the image, which simply collapse into blackness. It's particularly evident in scenes shot at night. I assumed that your gamma "medium" meant in the middle of the range, ie. 0. Is that correct?
Perhaps it's simply from living on the northern west coast of the continent with very blue light that I've become accustomed to it? I think it's difficult to get an acceptable calibration without a professional, and I can't afford to pay one to come and do it. By the way, nice receiver! I have a Marantz 2250 audio receiver that's probably forty years old and it produces excellent sound. I should look into getting an AV receiver, it would be nice to experience surround sound with my set-up. I've never been interested in a cable signal, I just watch TV series and movies on my computer, hooked up via HDMI directly to the set with audio through the Marantz, or on Netflix on my PS3, also directly hooked up. The sound on this set is fantastic.
Take care, and thanks again.