Anyone who has read my threads here over the years no I have no love for any particular technology. I could care less whether a PJ is DLP or LCOS. I preface my post with that simply to indicate that the following is not motivated by any dislike of DLP or because I am a fanboy of LCOS. So...

I was in the office of the largest A/V distributor in the country the other day. On the DLP side they sell Infocus and Sharp among others. The salesman commented to me that their sale of Sharp projectors has basically dried up since the JVC was released. They just aren't selling any. It's dead as a door knob.

With multiple LCOS manufactures now offering very high performance 5K PJ's and JVC OEMing I think DLP's time window for responding in the marketplace is getting much smaller. To date I don't think they really have responded. By CEDIA we need to see multiple manufacturers offering 1920 x 1080 single chip DLP competing at the same price level as the RS1 and Ruby. If that doesn't happen, I think DLP has abandoned all but the highest end (but they still have a very good foothold in the low end).

I predict we will see a response. With very good 1280 x 720 DLP machines now selling for less than 1K, it's very obvious that we should be able to see multiple 1920 x 1080 DLP offerings in the 5K range. It has to happen if DLP is going to stay in the high-end game.

I have to say that 3 years ago (before when the Ruby hit the market, when ever that was) I'd have NEVER guessed that we'd be seeing the situation we are now seeing. If anything I'd have guessed that LCOS would now have less market share than ever and maybe even be an also ran. Instead we've seen one of the most dramatic market changes to take place in such a small period of time. Really amazing.

I hope DLP surprises us and responds with a vengeance. Competition is good :).

I have to say that 3 years ago (before when the Ruby hit the market, when ever that was) I'd have NEVER guessed that we'd be seeing the situation we are now seeing. If anything I'd have guessed that LCOS would now have less market share than ever and maybe even be an also ran. Instead we've seen one of the most dramatic market changes to take place in such a small period of time. Really amazing.

I hope DLP surprises us and responds with a vengeance. Competition is good :).

Owning only an XGA pj up until last fall, reading about the significantly higher panel res and greater fill factor of an LCoS pj made them wistfully appealing, but it seemed like the technology had very little benefit besides that aspect. They were supposed to be loud, put out a lot of heat, were fairly expensive (easily more than double what my most generous budget would allow) and had poor black levels and CRs. Also up until last year, it seemed like peoples opinion of JVC here was a collective "pffftt". I remember just a couple years back, more than one person writing them off for never never having progressed beyond their early strengths.

It really is amazing how they came back and owned nearly everyone else almost overnight.

By CEDIA we need to see multiple manufacturers offering 1920 x 1080 single chip DLP competing at the same price level as the RS1 and Ruby
Is price really the issue? We already have several competing units, even at lower price points. DLP has been trumped technically for the time being - this is going to be very tough to respond to because of DLP's inherent design approach. For example, the need for dithering in low APL scenes. I find lack of dithering to be a be a huge advantage compared to my prior DLP - the JVC image is just so much cleaner that I could never go back.

Is price really the issue?
Yes, it's REALLY the issue :).
DLP has been trumped technically for the time being...
I think that's highly subjective. I think the JVC and the Sharp and the Marantz are highly competitive, though we may each have our preferences. The difference is that the JVC retails for $6300, the Sharp for $10,000 and the Marantz for $20,000. Now if there were other offerings in the $6300 price range (the Optoma is the only one I am aware of), there's also plenty of room for the Marantz's and Runco's of the world. But DLP NEEDS to have products at the same price range as the JVC and Sony units.

I think the Benq 9000/10000 is around the same price as the HD81 and JVC now.

Yes, it's REALLY the issue :).

I think that's highly subjective. I think the JVC and the Sharp and the Marantz are highly competitive, though we may each have our preferences. The difference is that the JVC retails for $6300, the Sharp for $10,000 and the Marantz for $20,000. Now if there were other offerings in the $6300 price range (the Optoma is the only one I am aware of), there's also plenty of room for the Marantz's and Runco's of the world. But DLP NEEDS to have products at the same price range as the JVC and Sony units.


DLP will answer. I'm not sure if it will be technically but just as JVC was forced to answer the Ruby and Pearl it will have to happen in price.

Art

I thought the Optoma HD81 retailed for 4299.00 now. That's what some of the large retailers are showing it at, and what people in the Optoma thread said awhile back.

Apparently this just happen and lots of places still show the higher price.

Q3: Didn't you see the training coming with Sony's SXRD announcement? PS - Tryg sure did, and how we all suffered :p
For numerous folks, myself included, a 1 chip DLP project will NEVER EVER be an answer, I don't care about price or contrast or uniformity or what.

I read that TI is moving from DLP to LCOS technology. Has that been confirmed?

a 1 chip DLP project will NEVER EVER be an answer,

Never say never around here. As people know I've never been a fan of 1-chip DLP because of RBE, but light sources with fast switching times (LED, etc.) are probably not that far off. I imagine a 1-chip DLP without color wheel could be pretty impressive.

Sequential display vs RGB tri-color simultaneous display? That is the real question, can sequential display ever match simultaneous? I wonder if the people who see artifacts of color wheels are either a small minority, or if there are inherent problems in sequential display that will never go away due to interference/moire issues (for lack of a better term)?

I read that TI is moving from DLP to LCOS technology. Has that been confirmed?

Do you have a link?
-- jaydillyo

I heard a rumor that even 3-chip DLP have RBE? What's that about?

It depends on how the individual DMDs modulate, and some people still see colour bursting though to a far lesser degree. I know some people who see 'rainbows' on other displays like CRTs so so it's not just limited to DLP.

Gary

I read that TI is moving from DLP to LCOS technology. Has that been confirmed?
That was an Aprils fool joke. Silly:)

Dancing mirrors are for fun houses, not serious home theater.
There will NEVER EVER be a DLP device in my home, no matter what the configuration.
I'm not alone in this feeling.

Dancing mirrors are for fun houses, not serious home theater.
There will NEVER EVER be a DLP device in my home, no matter what the configuration.
I'm not alone in this feeling.
What's the problem with 3 chip DLP? Except price?

What's the problem with 3 chip DLP? Except price?
Dithering/noise issues.
Also, I'm one of the unlucking ones who is sensitive to the pulsing of DLP devices which leads to fatigue, above and beyond the migraine-inducting colorwheel. Even Jason here at AVS agrees that DLP is not for everyone. But the point is moot for me; today the best options are with LCOS.

Period. ;)

You know, folks, one advantage of DLP, it seems to me, is that once it's calibrated, it will (or should) be absolutely stable forever, with the only variable being the lamp. Mirrors don't wear out or degrade. What happens to LCoS panels or LCD panels over time? Obviously, that will vary from one make to another, but it just seems to me they can warp, become non-uniform, or deteriorate in some shape or form.

I just calibrated my first Sharp 20K, and once it was fully dialed in, I was mightily impressed.

Chuck

What could be threatening to dlp is a next generation Pearl with tweaked contrast and user adjustable convergence at an even lower price than the current Pearl.
JVC , SONY and some other lcos company could represent a high enough volume to be scary to dlp.
As the situation is now dlp is just dominating less but still in domination in the market.

Yeah, the BenQs are already in that market now. The HD81 has been dragged into it too.

Thankfully, JVC is letting all the other PJ makers hang around. Imagine if they could actually produce more than 500 projectors a month for the US market, they might actually lock down some people wanting to buy projectors.

As it is right now, lots of folks are buying other PJs just because they cant get their hands on the RS1 or they are tired of waiting on one they pre-ordered 6 months ago.

You know, folks, one advantage of DLP, it seems to me, is that once it's calibrated, it will (or should) be absolutely stable forever, with the only variable being the lamp. Mirrors don't wear out or degrade. What happens to LCoS panels or LCD panels over time? Obviously, that will vary from one make to another, but it just seems to me they can warp, become non-uniform, or deteriorate in some shape or form.

I just calibrated my first Sharp 20K, and once it was fully dialed in, I was mightily impressed.

Chuck
Hey Chuck, good to see you on AVS. Heard you were on the east coast. :D

Agreed, the panels and polarizers used for LCOS/LCD are affected by heat. My PLV-70 light cannon had horrible issues with this problem - the 004 seems to be far better engineered to prevent the baking of the panels.

Hey Chuck, good to see you on AVS. Heard you were on the east coast. :D

Agreed, the panels and polarizers used for LCOS/LCD are affected by heat. My PLV-70 light cannon had horrible issues with this problem - the 004 seems to be far better engineered to prevent the baking of the panels.

Hi, Mike! Heading home tomorrow!

Actually, come to think of it, I suppose the DLP color wheel could deteriorate, but otherwise, it should be extremely stable.

Chuck

I heard a rumor that even 3-chip DLP have RBE? What's that about?
I have seen RBE on a 3-chip DLP. I even took some pictures of it. It happens on certain colors, such as dark yellow in this picture (http://home1.gte.net/res18h39/images/pen3.jpg). This particular model was made in 1997.

I would like to believe that newer models have improved in this regard. I recently saw a 3-chip DLP in a commercial theater, and I did not notice any RBE, although I was not really trying to look for it.

I don't understand how you could see RBE on a 3 chip DLP. RBE is a result of the color wheel in 1 chip DLP projs. 3 chip DLP projs. have no color wheel(s). Hence, no RBE.

Never say never around here. As people know I've never been a fan of 1-chip DLP because of RBE, but light sources with fast switching times (LED, etc.) are probably not that far off. I imagine a 1-chip DLP without color wheel could be pretty impressive.

Yes I've heard that DLP will get a tremendous performance/quality boost as a result of alternative light sources (i.e. SED, laser etc) when this becomes feasible. No more rainbows, no more dithering, with perfect convergence and uniformity.

I spent time with the Sim3000 and I swear it has no rainbows. I tried to see them and could not detect them at all not even in darker scenes. Dither with the new 1080 processing is a thing of the past. Once we get the new light source things will only get better but no reason for the other technologies to not benefit from these new light source as well.

I don't understand how you could see RBE on a 3 chip DLP. RBE is a result of the color wheel in 1 chip DLP projs. 3 chip DLP projs. have no color wheel(s). Hence, no RBE.


While I've never seen a 3-chip DLP, I am one of those folks who saw rainbows on my old CRT RPTV! And I'm not at all sensitive to the rainbows on 1-chip DLP.

I have no idea why rainbows were seen, but I believe the people who claim to have seen them.

I seriously doubt that these types of rainbows would ever be a real issue, however.

Mike

Dithering/noise issues.
Also, I'm one of the unlucking ones who is sensitive to the pulsing of DLP devices which leads to fatigue, above and beyond the migraine-inducting colorwheel. Even Jason here at AVS agrees that DLP is not for everyone. But the point is moot for me; today the best options are with LCOS.

Period. ;)

I honestly don't care what your technology of choice is, but it seems that your DLP preconceived notions are from 3-4 years ago.

Have you seen the Sim2 HT5000?
I have and it will trump your lowly Qualia like a Ferrari trumps a Kia.

Personally, I couldn't live with the LCoS weaknesses up until the RS1.
I could more than happily live with one but I'm holding out for solid state illumination.

The first manufacturer that satisfies my .sig gets my money.
Simple as that.
Competition is good.

I don't understand how you could see RBE on a 3 chip DLP. RBE is a result of the color wheel in 1 chip DLP projs. 3 chip DLP projs. have no color wheel(s). Hence, no RBE.

Yup, that's the theory, but in practice some people still see something which is similar to rainbows - the DMDs may not be modulating at exactly the same time for certain parts of the image, so in motion there may still be some color separation, albeit considerably reduced compared to single chippers.

Gary

I honestly don't care what your technology of choice is, but it seems that your DLP preconceived notions are from 3-4 years ago.

Have you seen the Sim2 HT5000?
I have and it will trump your lowly Qualia like a Ferrari trumps a Kia.

Having seen the Qualia, in my opinion my single chip dVision 1080p trumps it. Sharper by far ( I like a picture so sharp it makes your eyes bleed ), great color, no rainbows and I don't see any dithering either. good contast and lots of 3d " pop ", or blinding brightness if you need it. Still, it will be interesting to see whats next for DLP!!

The new 1080p DLP projectors don't have an issue with dithering. To say it is barely there is an understatement. You can go right up to the screen with your eye and inch away and barely make it out.

Compared to the Ruby, Pearl or Qualia the Marantz and Sharp run them into the ground. Image stability, sharpness, depth, unmatched. The RS-1 is a big step in the right direction though. It still shows more banding than the Marantz and the lens has too much chromatic error, but it is close to the sharpness and the blacks are better. Dimension is very close but I still think the Marantz edges it out a bit.

The Marantz is awfully loud though.........

I don't understand how you could see RBE on a 3 chip DLP. RBE is a result of the color wheel in 1 chip DLP projs. 3 chip DLP projs. have no color wheel(s). Hence, no RBE.

RBE can be caused by many factors. The color wheel in 1-chip DLP is only the most well known (notorious?). Anything that causes color separation such as refresh rate, phase, etc can cause it. Even the RS-1 has an RBE artifact of sorts, although it doesn't affect the entire image at one time and is seen relatively rarely.

The new 1080p DLP projectors don't have an issue with dithering. To say it is barely there is an understatement. You can go right up to the screen with your eye and inch away and barely make it out.


I agree, dithering in DLPs has improved tremendously.


Compared to the Ruby, Pearl or Qualia the Marantz and Sharp run them into the ground. Image stability, sharpness, depth, unmatched. The RS-1 is a big step in the right direction though. It still shows more banding than the Marantz and the lens has too much chromatic error, but it is close to the sharpness and the blacks are better. Dimension is very close but I still think the Marantz edges it out a bit.

The Marantz is awfully loud though.........

And expensive, relatively dim and has RBE. It would have been interesting to see more of an apples to apples comparison if the RS-1 had the price tag of the Marantz and had better optics, CMS, etc. The next projector from JVC might be such an animal though.

One thing that I've been seeing with the RS-1s is that the contrast seems to vary between units quite a bit. Some units have excellent contrast and others are less. My RS-1 "only" measures ~12000:1 on/off max although Greg Rogers measured ~19000:1 on his. So in user comparisons a lot of it comes down to the luck of the draw.

..., no rainbows ...!!


Craig,

I found that to be true as well with the dVision 1080p. I see rainbows quite easily, but I saw none on that projector at Cedia.

I was so impressed that I asked the entire packed crowd if *anyone* saw rainbows and the only replies were to the negative.

Do you know what was done to make improvements on that projector? What is the colorwheel speed?

Thanks,
Ken

Craig,

I found that to be true as well with the dVision 1080p. I see rainbows quite easily, but I saw none on that projector at Cedia.

I was so impressed that I asked the entire packed crowd if *anyone* saw rainbows and the only replies were to the negative.

Do you know what was done to make improvements on that projector? What is the colorwheel speed?

Thanks,
Ken

Its strange how different projectors using the same color Wheel must be doing things different between each manufacture. I d not see rainbows on the Marantz, Sim2 and Im hearing the dVision but I did see them on the sharp for some reason. As Kris stated dithering is no longer a concern. It will be interesting to see what DLPs next move will be.

Craig,

I found that to be true as well with the dVision 1080p. I see rainbows quite easily, but I saw none on that projector at Cedia.

I was so impressed that I asked the entire packed crowd if *anyone* saw rainbows and the only replies were to the negative.

Do you know what was done to make improvements on that projector? What is the colorwheel speed?

Thanks,
Ken

I have no idea Ken. Better optics, I have no guess. But the proof is in the pudding so to speak. Had 4 buddies over to watch the NBA playoffs last Tuesday. Nobody saw any rainbows. Thay just kept saying how it was like being there live. I must say that the game on TNT HD via Comcast cable looked stunning. Motion shots following players was super clean looking. Spectacular picture. They all want home theaters now. Or to move into our guest room.

Have you seen the Sim2 HT5000?
I have and it will trump your lowly Qualia like a Ferrari trumps a Kia.

ROTFLMAO! :p
I share my opinion about my dislike of DLP, and out comes the ususal suspects ready to do battle. Hey, it's all in fun. Remember, whatever technology you use, we are seeing quality today I could only dream about 4 years ago.
I like a picture so sharp it makes your eyes bleed
I like a picture that reminds me what I see in a good movie theater.
To each his own. ;)

One thing that I've been seeing with the RS-1s is that the contrast seems to vary between units quite a bit. Some units have excellent contrast and others are less. My RS-1 "only" measures ~12000:1 on/off max although Greg Rogers measured ~19000:1 on his. So in user comparisons a lot of it comes down to the luck of the draw.
I suspect "luck" had little to do with the fact that Greg's demo unit had exceptional contrast. As I recall his unit had next to no MC, water marks, lines in full field images, good uniformity... ;)

Folks will argue the fine points and superiority of the projector that they have 'emotionally bonded' with. Those arguments will go round and round forever.

What can be debated is the VALUE of the projector - technical tradeoffs vs cost. The current LCOS projectors win this contest hands down - this is the point of the whole thread, right?

What can be debated is the VALUE of the projector - technical tradeoffs vs cost. The current LCOS projectors win this contest hands down - this is the point of the whole thread, right?

Maybe. But I'll still be watching my dVision 1080p long after those who had a Ruby, then sold it and bought a Pearl, then sold it and bought an RS1, then sold it and bought the next great thing one year from now are waiting to buy the the flavor of the month. I don't imagine I'll sell my new Nissan 350 Z any time soon either. They both do exactly what I want and do it well. Sometimes spending more for quality optics and a superior build quality is actually cheaper in the long run. The dVisions contrast ratio may not spec out as great as the RS1's, but Milo's black T shirt on 24 last night looked superb ( too bad he got shot - he's off the show now! )!!

I can't get a DLP pj again until it is 1080p with 3 chips! Also affordable... :)

So, if one should buy a pj, should it be LCOS hands down?

Cheers

So, if one should buy a pj, should it be LCOS hands down?

Cheers

No. Depends which picture qualities you value most and which machine works best in your theater. There are several excellent DLP machines available.

Exactly my point, I believe that this thread is an exercise in futility. There are too many LCOS and DLP pjs and so many brands, and oh so many price points, and so many advantages on one side rather than the other. I think that if we have to compare, we should do it model by model, rather than by technology ...

Cheers

Exactly my point, I believe that this thread is an exercise in futility. There are too many LCOS and DLP pjs and so many brands, and oh so many price points, and so many advantages on one side rather than the other. I think that if we have to compare, we should do it model by model, rather than by technology ...

Cheers

I agree. It's like cars - they all get you from A to B, but some do certain things better ( or different ) than others. If my theater and needs were different, an RS1 might have been the better choice.

The new 1080p DLP projectors don't have an issue with dithering. To say it is barely there is an understatement. You can go right up to the screen with your eye and inch away and barely make it out.

Compared to the Ruby, Pearl or Qualia the Marantz and Sharp run them into the ground. Image stability, sharpness, depth, unmatched. The RS-1 is a big step in the right direction though. It still shows more banding than the Marantz and the lens has too much chromatic error, but it is close to the sharpness and the blacks are better. Dimension is very close but I still think the Marantz edges it out a bit.

The Marantz is awfully loud though.........

The Marantz shows us what can be done when price point is not a top priority, world class optics, video processing and excellent user interface. All of that could be added to either technology making a world class projector. Engineering without price constrains is fun, trying to build world class hardware with a price point is a challenge only the best engineering teams can pull off well.

I would add to your final line that the Marantz is expensive, loud, lacks world class full field contrast, it's not the brightest projector around, and did I mention expensive? To carry Andrikos's car analogy a little further, while I admire the guys that designed the Ferrari 599 I have a greater appreciation for the guys that came up with the Lotus Elise.

Exactly my point, I believe that this thread is an exercise in futility. There are too many LCOS and DLP pjs and so many brands, and oh so many price points, and so many advantages on one side rather than the other. I think that if we have to compare, we should do it model by model, rather than by technology ...

Cheers

I disagree , all points you mention should be taken into consideration. If you want max MTF and ANSI and no panel registration errors with possible RBE use one chip DLP. If you want max on /off CR less MTF and ANSI , with uniformity and color saturation issues use LCOS. If you want highest light output, good MTF and ANSI CR close to one chip DLP but lower than LCOS with a higher price get three chip DLP.

Art

So, if one should buy a pj, should it be LCOS hands down?

Cheers

Well, for NOW (i.e Spring 2007) the RS1 is far and away the best mid-hi end value out there.

For people who don't care about technologies and tweaking projectors to death, the RS1 will satisfy 99.99% of owners.

That might change soon, hopefully.

I agree with QQQ, DLP must respond because they're not at the forefront of image reproduction anymore. Make a note that I'm talking about 1-DLP.

3-DLP is almost universally regarded as the superior technology at a superior price :D.

ROTFLMAO! :p
I share my opinion about my dislike of DLP, and out comes the ususal suspects ready to do battle. Hey, it's all in fun. Remember, whatever technology you use, we are seeing quality today I could only dream about 4 years ago.

I like a picture that reminds me what I see in a good movie theater.
To each his own. ;)

Hey, I'm just saying. Go look at the HT5000.
Even Tryg likes it for god's sake.
If Tryg can be convinced, so can you ;)


What can be debated is the VALUE of the projector - technical tradeoffs vs cost. The current LCOS projectors win this contest hands down - this is the point of the whole thread, right?

Agreed

3-DLP is almost universally regarded as the superior technology at a superior price :D.
Universally Regarded = CINERAMAX
:p

BTW, I will be first in line to see the first VALUE oriented 3 chip DLP 1080p projector.

Well, for NOW (i.e Spring 2007) the RS1 is far and away the best mid-hi end value out there.

For people who don't care about technologies and tweaking projectors to death, the RS1 will satisfy 99.99% of owners.

That might change soon, hopefully.

I agree with QQQ, DLP must respond because they're not at the forefront of image reproduction anymore. Make a note that I'm talking about 1-DLP.

3-DLP is almost universally regarded as the superior technology at a superior price :D.You are stating personal opinion as though it were established fact.

The RS1 is the "best mid-hi end value out there" for those who don't care about reasonable color accuracy. For a lot of people, myself included, this is NOT a subtle or marginal consideration. And it isn't about "tweaking projectors to death". It's about pretty basic color realism. If you don't care about that and can live with sunburned faces and neon trees, then, yes, it's a great buy. If you do care, it's actually one of the worst choices available in its market segment.

Hey, I'm just saying. Go look at the HT5000.
Even Tryg likes it for god's sake.
If Tryg can be convinced, so can you ;)

Sorry - Tyrg can no longer be trusted for passionate unbiased views. :p
There is now a bottom line that will always be a factor whenever he posts.

Sorry - Tyrg can no longer be trusted for passionate unbiased views. :p
Didn't you mean to say passionately biased views ;)?

Didn't you mean to say passionately biased views ;)?

Well, he did have a silly smiley when he said it. ;)

While it can be argued if DLP will continue to dominate the consumer market, it will dominate the professional market for years to come. DLP is the accepted technology by DCI. That doesn't mean LCOS can't join in but so far it has not made the grade. The second generation Sony D-Cinema just came out so we sahll see. The first generation didn't cut it in the brightness.

2K DLP is currently being installed in all American D-Cinemas. These investements are for the long term. Unlike many members here, the cinema business doesn't go out every two years and upgrade. They can't based on their profit margins.

"You are stating personal opinion as though it were established fact.

The RS1 is the "best mid-hi end value out there" for those who don't care about reasonable color accuracy."

You are stating your personal opinion about color accuracy as though it were established fact.

Actually, it is a fact that it's not perfectly accurate, but the people who are not happy with that aspect of the RS1 are a minority.

Having seen the Qualia, in my opinion my single chip dVision 1080p trumps it. Sharper by far ( I like a picture so sharp it makes your eyes bleed ), great color, no rainbows and I don't see any dithering either. good contast and lots of 3d " pop ", or blinding brightness if you need it. Still, it will be interesting to see whats next for DLP!!

Is the dVision 1080 the same unit as the Projectiondesign Action model 3 ?

Dazzer

I don't understand how you could see RBE on a 3 chip DLP. RBE is a result of the color wheel in 1 chip DLP projs. 3 chip DLP projs. have no color wheel(s). Hence, no RBE.
A color wheel is not the only possible cause of RBE. Another possible cause is PWM (pulse width modulation).

For example, when the 3-chip DLP projects a dark yellow, it is projecting light from the red panel and the green panel. Sometimes they are projecting at the same point in time, so a flash of yellow is projected (since red+green=yellow). However, sometimes they are not projecting at the same point in time, so a flash of red is projected, or a flash of green is projected. These flashes happen so quickly that you usually perceive a single color, which is dark yellow in this case.

However, if you move your eyes quickly, you might be able to see separate flashes of different colors. One easy way to reveal the color separation is to quickly wave a thin white object in the beam of light between the projector and the screen (without moving your eyes), while projecting a single color. That way, if there is any color separation, it will be obvious, because the object will change colors as it is being waved through the air (preferably looking at the object against a dark background, such as a wall, not against the image on the screen). I used this method to take pictures of the RBE, waving a white pen.

I wonder if any other owners of 3-chip DLP have dared to use this method. :)
Yup, that's the theory, but in practice some people still see something which is similar to rainbows - the DMDs may not be modulating at exactly the same time for certain parts of the image, so in motion there may still be some color separation, albeit considerably reduced compared to single chippers.

Gary
On the old 3-chip DLP, the color separation for dark yellow is almost as noticeable as it is on a 1-chip DLP with a 3x color wheel. I determined this by measuring the timing of the flashes.

Anyway, for some other colors, such as peak white, the 3-chip DLP has little or no RBE, whereas the 1-chip DLP still has substantial RBE.

Here's what I don't get:
1) Projected film - the gold standard for movies - is transmissive (light thru film). Currently, the only transmissive technology is good ol' LCD. Shouldn't we hope for vast improvements in LCD projection for film-based viewing (light through panels with enough resolution to mimic film)?
2) Video - all HD video production today uses digital based cameras with 3 CCD chips (light is captured by a panel, and reflected back) Therefore, the best way to mimic these clips is a LCOS based projector (light is focused on a panel, and reflected back), right?

I know this is a gross simplification, but if I take the viewpoint that home projection should appoximate the method used to capture the image intially, then I would need two projectors for my dream system: LCD for film/LCOS for video. DLP is not an option in this case, although it is reflective, but the method to create the image is digital, whereas LCOS is analog like CCD.

Is the dVision 1080 the same unit as the Projectiondesign Action model 3 ?

Yes.

Here's what I don't get:
1) Projected film - the gold standard for movies - is transmissive (light thru film). Currently, the only transmissive technology is good ol' LCD. Shouldn't we hope for vast improvements in LCD projection for film-based viewing (light through panels with enough resolution to mimic film)?
2) Video - all HD video production today uses digital based cameras with 3 CCD chips (light is captured by a panel, and reflected back) Therefore, the best way to mimic these clips is a LCOS based projector (light is focused on a panel, and reflected back), right?

I know this is a gross simplification, but if I take the viewpoint that home projection should appoximate the method used to capture the image intially, then I would need two projectors for my dream system: LCD for film/LCOS for video. DLP is not an option in this case, although it is reflective, but the method to create the image is digital, whereas LCOS is analog like CCD.

So using optical media like DVD's must be heresy in your book!!

...but the people who are not happy with that aspect of the RS1 are a minority.Is that a fact, or just an observation based on an un-scientific AVS poll ? ;)

Perhaps the majority of owners are too embarrased to admit that they just spent a big wad of money on an HDTV projector that is incapable of meeting HDTV colour standards. :eek:

In any case what does the majority have to do with it ? I wouldn't be surprised if up until a short while ago the majority of J6PKs perferred 4:3 aspect ratio DVDs because it "fits their TV better" :D

Brent

Here's what I don't get:
1) Projected film - the gold standard for movies - is transmissive (light thru film). Currently, the only transmissive technology is good ol' LCD. Shouldn't we hope for vast improvements in LCD projection for film-based viewing (light through panels with enough resolution to mimic film)?
2) Video - all HD video production today uses digital based cameras with 3 CCD chips (light is captured by a panel, and reflected back) Therefore, the best way to mimic these clips is a LCOS based projector (light is focused on a panel, and reflected back), right?

I know this is a gross simplification, but if I take the viewpoint that home projection should appoximate the method used to capture the image intially, then I would need two projectors for my dream system: LCD for film/LCOS for video. DLP is not an option in this case, although it is reflective, but the method to create the image is digital, whereas LCOS is analog like CCD.

I don't care if you open up the box and there is a reliable rat on a treadmill inside , if the picture is great. Mike, I don't get your logic. The reflected image is the proof in the pudding.However that is derived really shouldn't matter in the judgement.



Art

So using optical media like DVD's must be heresy in your book!!
The method of capturing film frames to a portable digital format is not perfect - we all know this. But it's the best we can do right now. After all, a frame of visual information is a frame of visual information. :p

I don't care if you open up the box and there is a reliable rat on a treadmill inside , if the picture is great. Mike, I don't get your logic. The reflected image is the proof in the pudding.However that is derived really shouldn't matter in the judgement.

Art
That would be one hell of a rat! :D
My point is: if film is a transmissive medium, then would it make sense to duplicate the process in the home? FWIW, it's an academic arguement, but I still believe it's a valid one.

That would be one hell of a rat! :D
My point is: if film is a transmissive medium, then would it make sense to duplicate the process in the home? FWIW, it's an academic arguement, but I still believe it's a valid one.

It makes sense concerning color reproduction. For contrast I really prefer a system that does not operate like film which can't do real blacks under normal circumstances.

I don't care if you open up the box and there is a reliable rat on a treadmill inside

:D Imagine the discussions around here of tweaks and mods if that were the case lol.

,The reflected image is the proof in the pudding.However that is derived really shouldn't matter in the judgement.


Very true. The thing that I've found most amazing about all of these digital technologies is that they continue to improve and converge towards the same goal. You would think after all of these years that the inherent benefits of one technology over the others would emerge and allow it to dominate but that clearly isn't the case.

I know this is a gross simplification

Yes it is at best.

[QUOTE=Mark Petersen]:D Imagine the discussions around here of tweaks and mods if that were the case lol.
QUOTE]

lol...need more brightness...no problem...just drop a couple teaspoons of Red Bull in his water bottle.

[QUOTE=Mark Petersen]:D Imagine the discussions around here of tweaks and mods if that were the case lol.
QUOTE]

lol...need more brightness...no problem...just drop a couple teaspoons of Red Bull in his water bottle.


The organic high bulb setting lol. May cause premature aging though... :)

It would also be interesting to see what the Wizard of Oz would look like if you dropped some scotch into his water bottle. :eek:

Speaking of DLP, I saw the Optoma H81 on sale in the $4K range with another mail in rebate. Wow, people who paid $6000+ a few months ago must be hot.

I love the price war.

I don't care if you open up the box and there is a reliable rat on a treadmill inside , if the picture is great. Mike, I don't get your logic.
This is one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read here. Anyone knows a hamster driven picture is much smoother and natural looking than a rat driven picture.

That would be one hell of a rat! :D
My point is: if film is a transmissive medium, then would it make sense to duplicate the process in the home? FWIW, it's an academic arguement, but I still believe it's a valid one.
If you are talking about the ultimate expression of technology, then no, you are wrong because the design is inherently flawed. Think about it, a transmissive medium will ALWAYS leave something behind, whereas a reflective medium (if technology permits), will leave far less behind. A nice oversimplification of the whole process :p

This is one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read here. Anyone knows a hamster driven picture is much smoother and natural looking than a rat driven picture.

So you're saying a hamster driven wheel would be more "film like" ? That's good for those who suffer from RTE (Rat's Tail Effect) and I'm sure some will swear they do :p

You are stating personal opinion as though it were established fact.

The RS1 is the "best mid-hi end value out there" for those who don't care about reasonable color accuracy. For a lot of people, myself included, this is NOT a subtle or marginal consideration. And it isn't about "tweaking projectors to death". It's about pretty basic color realism. If you don't care about that and can live with sunburned faces and neon trees, then, yes, it's a great buy. If you do care, it's actually one of the worst choices available in its market segment.
Truer words have never been spoken... Tom's post should be posted at the top of this forum (above all the sponsors) with flashing neon lights around it.

Hate to bring this thread back on topic, but let's see what the Infocus IN82 can do. Perhaps DLP is on the verge of responding?

A Few thoughts:

JVC does a hit indeed with the RS1 HD1 but still has huge problems supplying though there are countries with stock and other without while they have huge demand (bottom line: there's a huge internal problem among JVC units country by country as they compete with eachother...)

the RS1 HD1 indeed have caused lots of cancellations of other brands pjs, it's a big blow for OPTOMA SHARP MARANTZ SIM2 SONY BENQ (machines sold from $4000 to 15,000).

the measured massive on off CR and huge word of mouth and worldwide amazing reviews + well done JVC presentations are paying off. even though the ANSI CR of DLP still is 2x higher :)

so there's buzz of a new DLP Chip with capabilities of 10,000:1 CR on off without an iris under way. but still the 3Chip architecture remains more expensive than the DILA 3chip and so is the price per chip.

as QQQ said, who would have thought LCOS/SXRD/DILA would hit so hard (and who would have thought JVC had in its lab such mega contrast chips after being stuck at 2000:1)

DLP pjs sell well under $2500 but the 5-15K market is being completely modified.

Truer words have never been spoken... Tom's post should be posted at the top of this forum (above all the sponsors) with flashing neon lights around it.

How come I knew this was coming?

The RS1 is the "best mid-hi end value out there" for those who don't care about reasonable color accuracy. For a lot of people, myself included, this is NOT a subtle or marginal consideration. And it isn't about "tweaking projectors to death". It's about pretty basic color realism. If you don't care about that and can live with sunburned faces and neon trees, then, yes, it's a great buy. If you do care, it's actually one of the worst choices available in its market segment.

This is an exaggeration here. You can tone the image down on the JVC to where you dont have sunburned faces and neon grass. Hasnt it already been established, even just by a sampling of our very, much more, anal AVS population, that pleasing colors are preferred by a vast majority over accurate colors?

In my opinion, the above is true for calibrators and a handful of folks who prefer to be able to tweak their projectors to "accurate" colors. For most of us the JVC controls satisfy, and for a lot of others, who need more, the controls available on some video processors fit the bill.

Even if you had to add a video processor, that makes it cost more than the Sharp 20k, for it to have accurate color it would still likely be a better value because in the opinion of OBJECTIVE reviewers, as it stands (without VS and CMS,) they prefer it - with picture being the only consideration.

It makes sense concerning color reproduction. For contrast I really prefer a system that does not operate like film which can't do real blacks under normal circumstances.
All I know is that when I've seen great IMAX, 70mm or 35mm projection, the process of the light passing through the film produces an image that has georgous saturated colors with a sense of 3-D. I believe this is due to the transmissive process that starts with the film in the camera.

OTOH, digital projection (Star Wars 6) in the theater looked flat and dull. Admittedly, poor ANSI contrast may be a factor, but I firmly believe that the transmissive nature of film produces the best image today.

Listen how Alan, with his 35mm projector, always raves that no digital porjector comes close to the experience of his transmissive film projection.

J.Mike
Film advantages are
1 color gamut
2 limited contrast ratio BUT close to infinate levels of intensity. In video terms film has a lot higher bit depth. Film is not limited to some 200 levels as video is.

J.Mike
Film advantages are
1 color gamut
2 limited contrast ratio BUT close to infinate levels of intensity. In video terms film has a lot higher bit depth. Film is not limited to some 200 levels as video is.
Yes - that's a key component - thanks for reminding me. ;)
Maybe HDMI 1.3 xvYCC will fix the current weakness in the digital realm.

Hate to bring this thread back on topic, but let's see what the Infocus IN82 can do. Perhaps DLP is on the verge of responding?

That will be true iff:

1) Price <$5k
2) CR > 10k:1
3) Lumens > 800 calibrated which shouldn't be a problem for IF.
4) no DI

A pretty tough combination I must say.
I doubt it will become true.

This is one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read here. Anyone knows a hamster driven picture is much smoother and natural looking than a rat driven picture.

Put a snake in that cage to increase the colorwheel speed in order to reduce rainbows.

The hamster lifetime, however, may be limited by stress induced heart attack or consumption by its predator.

How far do you want to take this?
There's quite a bit of material left. ;)

The new 1080p DLP projectors don't have an issue with dithering. To say it is barely there is an understatement. You can go right up to the screen with your eye and inch away and barely make it out.

Compared to the Ruby, Pearl or Qualia the Marantz and Sharp run them into the ground. Image stability, sharpness, depth, unmatched. The RS-1 is a big step in the right direction though. It still shows more banding than the Marantz and the lens has too much chromatic error, but it is close to the sharpness and the blacks are better. Dimension is very close but I still think the Marantz edges it out a bit.

The Marantz is awfully loud though.........
Agreed Kris!
And not to mention not as sexy as some of the more recent body designs from other PJ manufacturers........however, I've had a Ruby (2 in fact) and a Pearl in my room to compare (for commercial reasons) and in terms of image quality they may as well not have been there. Yes the Marantz is $20k but there is absolutely no comparison when you set eyes on the stellar image from the Marantz.

More recently I've had the JVC in my room for several hours on two seaparate occasions and while I was pleased with the machines overall sharpness when I did an a/b comparision but felt the Marantz had it beat in every department. I've yet to see anything that knocks me out as much as the Marantz does on an appropriately sized screen for its light output capability.

I was expecting fade to black on the JVC to be fantastic due to its deep blacks but in all honesty I wasn't impressed by that either. How can you do a true CRT like fade to black with all the highlighted corners lightling up the screen in this odd way?

Shades of LYCOS/SXRD? Pun intended!

well you had probably bad units 'cause not all have light corners. the most recent units I saw were excellent in that department.
the Marantz has NO brigthness. (personnaly a pj should be stellar on a 120-160" screen)
i agree it's probably with the new Sharp the best dlp in the market, brigthness taken out of the equation (andwe know all the side effects of high gain on DLP images...)
nevertheless the HD1 RS1 giant splash in the projectors lake is unprecedented.

QQQ,

I like the premise of your thread and I would like to continue on that premise.

I don't think DLP has to respond it would just be nice if it did. If anyone noticed, LCD is also doing battle in the 1080p market and that is the real competition for LCoS. As long as there are two technologies battling we will be fine.

1-chip DLP has a few really good advantages:

1. It has perfect convergence (although lesser optics might show some smearing).

2. The ability to use RGB LEDs as light sources (However next gen LEDs will be necessary for 1000+ lumen projector)

3. The capability to pixel shift. (I say "capability" because current "Smoothpicture" implementations are not that great visually.)

DLP's inherent disadvantages:

A. Less true R,G,B lumens for the same wattage bulb. ("Brilliantcolor" and other DLP tricks pump brightness artificially.

B. Rainbow Effect. It is still a viewer specific issue that will be further improved by L.E.D. light sources)

C. Poor installation flexibility. Per an Infocus engineer comments, the light output of DLP projectors is not as easy to offset up and down (or left and right) as it is with LCD or LCoS.

Currently DLP has number 1 as advantage but 2 and 3 have yet to be realized effectively. On the Negative side, A - C are all current problems that still need attention. So DLP has good potential, but the problems, which used to be minor issues, are now big drawback versus the competition. Also, I no longer consider price (due to 1-chip simplicity) to be an inherent superiority for DLP - there are just too many cheap LCD projectors to dispel what I thought to be perpetual advantage.

I think another problem is foreign companies don't have complete faith in TI. TI plays games here and there with pricing and projected availability; they also like taut gimmicks as serious advances. I think the Asian companies cooperate better amongst themselves.

It would be good if DLP responds with some solid 1080p offerings, but the don't have to respond. TI must respond for their sake not ours.

-Mr. Wigggles

Why is this thread now all about J. Mike?

I think he is being purposely argumentative guys. (Maybe he's a little bit lonely or something.)

-Mr. Wigggles

Why is this thread now all about J. Mike?

I think he is being purposely argumentative guys. (Maybe he's a little bit lonely or something.)

-Mr. Wigggles
Didn't you get the email:
Everything is about ME!
:p

(PS: no more highjacking ;) )

The RS1 is the "best mid-hi end value out there" for those who don't care about reasonable color accuracy. For a lot of people, myself included, this is NOT a subtle or marginal consideration. And it isn't about "tweaking projectors to death". It's about pretty basic color realism. If you don't care about that and can live with sunburned faces and neon trees, then, yes, it's a great buy. If you do care, it's actually one of the worst choices available in its market segment.

Tom have you had a chance to see the RS-1 being fed with properly decoded video? The reason I ask is that in a recent thread you mentioned that it was the first time you've seen an RS-1 and then the thread went on to pin point that the problem with the color accuracy that you were seeing was actually due to the C2 VP that was being used which caused Rec 709 to be decoded as Rec 601 which is known to cause gross problems in green.

The RS-1 is not CMS color accurate, but if fed with 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 (to avoid the internal JVC RGB decoding bug), it renders reasonable (but not perfect) colors. The oversaturation problem is no worse than other projectors at this price point and I think the typical viewer will find that it has "reasonable" color accuracy. I do agree with you though that the addition of CMS would have been better.

EDIT: To put the oversaturation and sunburned skintone issue into perspective, Greg Rogers said this about the RS-1:

"The RS1 primary colors are considerably more saturated than the standard SMPTE-C color gamut, but many viewers will find them seductive. However, the green fields of the Shire in The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring (2001) were overly vivid and beyond what I consider realistic. The red primary is actually less oversaturated than many other lamp-based projectors. Although I didn’t find it objectionable, I was very aware that Leeloo’s hair in The Fifth Element was more saturated than normal. Her skin, however,looked quite natural. Pierce Brosnan’s skin tones in The Thomas Crown Affair (1999), which is a deeply saturated film transfer, were too dark. They weren’t orange or sunburned, but they were too deep to appear natural. Reducing the Color control to improve the flesh tones diluted other colors more than I would have preferred."

So when I read this it sounds like the color accuracy of the RS-1 is "reasonable" for the price but not perfect, which is about how I would describe it too.

Agreed Kris!

Sorry but I don't agree with you!
Kris's post is spot on. (He purchased this gear too).
I don't agree with Tom Huffman's criticism either as the external processor has a decoding error.
Kris Derring's post is that needle in a haystack. Greg Rodgers and the other professional reviewers also did a fine job. But Kris sums it all up beautifully. He had the patience to keep quiet until he formed a honest, clear and valid opinion.:)

The only remaining question is how does the BenQ W9000 and W10000 rate against the Sharp or JVC?

It would be good if DLP responds with some solid 1080p offerings, but the don't have to respond. TI must respond for their sake not ours.

Ahhhhh.... this sounds so nice. It's just that for the many years before the Ruby came out, Texas Instruments acted like they owned the whole market. It is so nice to see them get served. I'm so happy I was able to go from a CRT to a Ruby and skip the whole 720p DLP milking process. I will never, ever forget 4-5 years ago when Texas Instruments actually thought they could keep 1080p from consumers and stricly keep above 720p for commercial theaters.

With the Sony Diamond coming out... It's hopefully only going to get significantly better...

Tom have you had a chance to see the RS-1 being fed with properly decoded video? Subsequently, yes.

So when I read this it sounds like the color accuracy of the RS-1 is "reasonable" for the price but not perfectThe Epson TW1000 offers much better color and it's less than half the price. The Sharp XV-Z12000 MKII offers even better color and it's 1/3 the price, though it's 720p.

This is really a pointless argument that this forum has gone round and round about for quite a while now.

My post specifically referred to those who care about accurate color, by which I meant that accurate color was high on the list of desirable image characteristics. As has been pointed out many times, not everyone is feels this way. That's fine. People have different priorities. But for those who rank accurate color as a very high priority I stand by my statement that the RS1 is one of the worst offenders in this market segment--even worse than the SXRDs, which I used to to think were pretty bad in this regard.

The RS1 has a lot of strengths. It is definitely the sharpest LCoS unit I have ever seen and its on/off CR is superb. But its color performance is a good deal worse than "not perfect." It's beyond what I would consider acceptable, but, hey, that's me.

While I've never seen a 3-chip DLP, I am one of those folks who saw rainbows on my old CRT RPTV! And I'm not at all sensitive to the rainbows on 1-chip DLP.

I have no idea why rainbows were seen, but I believe the people who claim to have seen them.

I seriously doubt that these types of rainbows would ever be a real issue, however.

Mike


I've seen rainbows on my plasma, a lot actually so I'm with you in the believers camp.

Subsequently, yes.


Please don't take my comments personally, I was just curious if your opinion was based on first hand observations with an RS-1 that was being fed without either the C2 or JVC decoding bug and it sounds like it has.

Everyone is allowed to have their opinions and I respect yours about the RS-1, but personally imho the color accuracy issue of the RS-1 is overblown. JVC designed the RS-1 to answer Sony and imho I think the colors are better than both the Pearl and Ruby but that is my opinion based on less red push that I see with skintones and also the CIE color charts that I've seen. I don't find the RS-1 perfect but on balance it's has a lot going for it (sharpness, lumens, contrast, lack of RBE, etc.).

If I understand this thread correctly though, it was meant to be a discussion about DLP technology and I see color accuracy as something that while important, is basically technology agnostic. It comes down to the choices that a manufacturer is willing to make (color primaries, filters, etc.) rather than something inherent in the technology. JVC for example has incorporated CMS into other products so I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see this feature in a projector soon. Some people have even argued that 1-chip DLP suffers from a lack of color saturation compared to 3-chip because of the temporal nature of the color filtering that is applied. 1-chip looks fine to my eyes as far as saturation goes though.

With the Sony Diamond coming out... It's hopefully only going to get significantly better...

What is the Sony Diamond ? Do we have an idea what they are working on ?

Art

What is the Sony Diamond ? Do we have an idea what they are working on ?

Art
I'd be interested to hear the true answer to this question as well.

OTOH, digital projection (Star Wars 6) in the theater looked flat and dull. Admittedly, poor ANSI contrast may be a factor, but I firmly believe that the transmissive nature of film produces the best image today.
.
Not ANSI, On-Off! 2000:1 is flat looking with any darker scenes. Dull colors are not part of DLP. Cinema DLP can do colors film can't (and vice versa).