I guess I'm late to the party that's been going on here. Seems that the Sim2 3 chip 1080p projectors are the new 'gold standard' for resonable high end front projection (note the emphasis on reasonable!).

I'm looking for a replacement for the 004, and had been spending most of my time in the LCOS forum. But the buzz is here, and now that the color wheel is no longer a factor, I guess I owe it to myself to find a dealer in the DC area and check these Sim2 babies out. :D

I guess I'm late to the party that's been going on here. Seems that the Sim2 3 chip 1080p projectors are the new 'gold standard' for resonable high end front projection (note the emphasis on reasonable!).

I'm looking for a replacement for the 004, and had been spending most of my time in the LCOS forum. But the buzz is here, and now that the color wheel is no longer a factor, I guess I owe it to myself to find a dealer in the DC area and check these Sim2 babies out. :D


I think so at the moment. The PD M80 looks like it will be a killer when it hits.

It also depends who you ask. CINERMAX probably thinks they are the current "Green standard":)

J.Mike,
Instead of visiting a dealer, fly to our resident HT stud (AKA Art Sonneborn) and view his insane system at its peak glory.
Art is the nicest guy and I'll bet he would have no trouble helping you out.

Time to exorcise your DLP demons by viewing one of the best systems on the planet.

Wow !:D Anyway, Mike is certainly welcome to come up.

Art

Color wheel? 3 chips are what Art has...... unless you are looking at a single chip...

You?! I thought you'd never part with your Qualia!!!

J. Mike. I assume you'd be interested in the new C3x 1080p and not the model 50000 Art has. Anyway its not out yet and unless you can find a pre-buy dealer who ordered at the old $30,000 MSRP, the new MSRP is $32000. Most Sim2 dealers have pre sold a bunch of these already.

Mark are those 1 chip or 3 chip..

And what are the Lumens on the C3Xe?

Thanks

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=932504&page=3

Three chippers. The preliminary spec sheets didn't specify the number of ANSI lumens. The walking talk has been 2000 though.

Three chippers. The preliminary spec sheets didn't specify the number of ANSI lumens. The walking talk has been 2000 though.
Prelim specs were given as 1000-2500 iris dependant for the C3X1080.

i had a demo from the 5000 some months
ago in my cinema and
i measured about 1900 lumen at 5600:1 on off cr.

i had a demo from the 5000 some months
ago in my cinema and
i measured about 1900 lumen at 5600:1 on off cr.

I'd say that is similar to what we have. The on /off is better than the last generation of 1080p one chip DLPs,not as good as the RS1. The ANSI blows away any SXRD or DILA. We measured 22fL on a 14' 1.2 nominal gain screen.

Art

i had a demo from the 5000 some months
ago in my cinema and
i measured about 1900 lumen at 5600:1 on off cr.


Just for fun Wolfgang, do you have any pictures of the front of your room finished that you could share with us ?

Art

art
do you mean the front with the screen?

Prelim specs were given as 1000-2500 iris dependant for the C3X1080.

my measurments was at best cr.the unit have.

art
do you mean the front with the screen?

Yes !:)

Art

ok art

this pictures are only for you:)

this are some of the lenses i test with my christie 3 chip dlp

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/509/IMG_0832.JPG


this is the back of my cinema

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/509/IMG_10981_2_.JPG


and this is the screen

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/509/IMG_11151_2_.JPG

i change all the speaker since i made this pictures.
to bad because i lost hearing from my right ear i cant detect anymore
from where the sound comes from:mad::mad::mad:
still hope it comes back but after almost 4 months.......

Wow!! How wide is that screen?!

i change all the speaker since i made this pictures.
to bad because i lost hearing from my right ear i cant detect anymore
from where the sound comes from:mad::mad::mad:
still hope it comes back but after almost 4 months.......
Oh dear. Once we find the ideal room, projector and sound system and can afford it we no longer have the necessary eyes and ears to fully appreciate. :(

its a 2.35 format screen with 7x3m(275"x118")


Oh dear. Once we find the ideal room, projector and sound system and can afford it we no longer have the necessary eyes and ears to fully appreciate. :(

yes and therefore i try to purchase a new pr. as soon as possible
knowing there will be always some better one
soon out but you never know for sure if you can use it or not.
i am unluckily a good sample for that:mad:

Wolfgang,
Sorry to hear about your hearing loss. It's impressive to me how much you do with projectors ! As of about eight months ago I have persistant ringing in my left ear.Fortunately, at least as of now, the optometrist can keep my vision corrected to enjoy my video.:)

As you had pointed out to me years ago, the added ANSI contrast of DLP is a big deal. Despite coming in at under 6000:1 on /off the HT 5000 has a picture that is one of the most impressive I've seen.

At least in the case of the HT5000 ,the only choices I had for lenses were throw ratios ( L2,3,4 etc).

Anyway ,thanks for the peak into your incredible room.:) It seems to have turned out beautifully with the way you opened up the front to get to that 23 foot wide screen. (yes Jeff ,that's 23' wide !)

Golly folks. I am pumped and confused at the same time. Confused because it looks like I have to change ship.

1) I swore I'd never pay $30000 for another projector. So much for that! :rolleyes: Frankly, I've loved the 004 - it has operated flawlessly since day one and I can't say that for any other video device I've ever had, and that fact alone is important. I never worry that the 004 will perform when I ask it to. But I'm becoming more aware of it's serious ANSI limitations. Last night I had the group over to watch Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut (X rated natch :p ). The Blu-ray transfer is excellent, but the ANSI limits of the 004 were painfully obvious in the opening party scene. Kubrick likes to use natural lighting here and the image is flat, dull, lifeless via the 004. Other well lit scenes are of course spectacular. I demand improvement here!

2) The whole dynamic iris approch is a turnoff. It's like putting lipstick on a pig. If this is Sony's approach to addressing the limitations of LCOS technology, then I need to be looking elsewhere for "the perfect vision."

3) I start a new job Tuesday doing something I love and am considered an SME at, and at a considerable increase in salary (see #1 above ;) ). So by 1st quarter next year, I should be able to move to the next level of projection.

4) If the AVS shootout happens, I'll be there, possibly checkbook in hand.

I am looking around, too... Sometime next year.. Curious to see what comes out. I know Art is thrilled with his and I know Sony will annouce a Qualia replacement. So, I am hoping for 2-3 choices.

Last I checked, the Runco VX55 is a Christie based 3 chip DLP Projector.

I am a puny single chip DLP (sim2 ht380) but I admire the screen sizes 3 chip offers.

This is so absolutely magnificent, I openly weep just looking at it.
http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/509/IMG_11151_2_.JPG

Last I checked, the Runco VX55 is a Christie based 3 chip DLP Projector.


Ash,
The only thing about the Runco units that scares me is the contast numbers. As I said before, even at just under 6000:1 my SIM is just cutting it in contrast ratio IMO. The VX55 is about 1/3 of that.

Of course if you want a 20' wide screen then that would be one of the few options but say 12' to 16' range I believe there are better options.

Art




Art

middle 2008 we will have some new pr.that offer more
cr. for sure thanks to the dc4.

likely a bright barco or dpi 3 chip with high light out AND good cr. may in the
5000-7000 range.

may christie will have a high cr. unit as well.

also a new sim2 5000 with dc4 and may a dual lamp design with
may 3000-4000 lumens at may 8000-10000:1

also the qualia replacment may hit in 08.

the new 4k jvc will be there with more than 10000:1 on off but
may the ansi cr. thanks lcos is not as high as dlp can offer.
question will be if the unit will have hdcp?

all speculation?
no this pr. will hit the market in 08 the only question is the qualia replacment .

possible also that ti surprise us all with the first 4k pr.
but this one will be for sure not a consumer version same as the upcoming
jvc 4k.

I'm concerned about the build quality of JVC units, based on feedback on AVS. Is this a real issue?

middle 2008 we will have some new pr.that offer more
cr. for sure thanks to the dc4.

likely a bright barco or dpi 3 chip with high light out AND good cr. may in the
5000-7000 range.

may christie will have a high cr. unit as well.

also a new sim2 5000 with dc4 and may a dual lamp design with
may 3000-4000 lumens at may 8000-10000:1

also the qualia replacment may hit in 08.

the new 4k jvc will be there with more than 10000:1 on off but
may the ansi cr. thanks lcos is not as high as dlp can offer.
question will be if the unit will have hdcp?

all speculation?
no this pr. will hit the market in 08 the only question is the qualia replacment .

possible also that ti surprise us all with the first 4k pr.
but this one will be for sure not a consumer version same as the upcoming
jvc 4k.


Sounds like tons to look foward to ! DLP with thousands of lumens 10,000 on off and ANSI pop would be my pick right now.

Art

Ash,
The only thing about the Runco units that scares me is the contast numbers. As I said before, even at just under 6000:1 my SIM is just cutting it in contrast ratio IMO.

Agreed, you cannot get high contrast out of a cermax lamp for many reasons.

As proven by DPI's matching of your on /off contrast with the introduction of the Highlite Reference, ANY new digital cinema chassis can be tricked up for the SAME EXACT LEVEL of on/off contrast . There is no inherent advantage to the uhp based 3 dlp's over the larger xenon based units, in any category except price and power consumption. There are a myriad advantages of the Barco over the uhp based 3 chippers which are essentially uncalibrateable (by virtue of their funky primaries, and the rapidly decreasing output of the uhp's lamps red spectrae, which becomes a moving target), if one want's to use the correct 5nm wavelength metrics that is. And who wouldn't one want that?

Not pissing away 30% ansi contrast ratio and introducing artificial stretches is the clincher with the Barco (due to servo zoom, focus and lens tilt) as ANSI cr directly translates into MTF: Visual Imaging most important parameter. What is interesting is that the price of a fully modded Barco DP1500 is a little bit more than a Runco VX-55.

Agreed, you cannot get high contrast out of a cermax lamp for many reasons.

As proven by DPI's matching of your on /off contrast with the introduction of the Highlite Reference, ANY new digital cinema chassis can be tricked up for the SAME EXACT LEVEL of on/off contrast . There is no inherent advantage to the uhp based 3 dlp's over the larger xenon based units, in any category except price and power consumption. There are a myriad advantages of the Barco over the uhp based 3 chippers which are essentially uncalibrateable (by virtue of their funky primaries, and the rapidly decreasing output of the uhp's lamps red spectrae, which becomes a moving target), if one want's to use the correct 5nm wavelength metrics that is. And who wouldn't one want that?

Not pissing away 30% ansi contrast ratio and introducing artificial stretches is the clincher with the Barco (due to servo zoom, focus and lens tilt) as ANSI cr directly translates into MTF: Visual Imaging most important parameter. What is interesting is that the price of a fully modded Barco DP1500 is a little bit more than a Runco VX-55.

I do wish that those tricked up (out) units were available to look at. This is my opinion. Smart manufacturers would make sure that there were rooms or homes where their best could be viewed in an optimized state in every way including the room. There ,those who are really looking for what the best can do could look and then feel comfortable writing checks. I saw my projector twice at CEDIA then here before buying. This sort of thing isn't there often enough.

One of my reasons for not going with DPI was the out right "I wouldn't go that big with this projector" comment by Mark Bradley at CEDIA when I said I wanted to used a 14' wide screen.

Art

The Runcos retail is 200k. I agree at that price I would prefer to go the extra mile and get the Barco unless there were a feature limitation restricting the choice to one or the other.

the only question is the qualia replacment
If Sony is able to improve On/OFF and ANSI Contrast equal to the best of the 3 chippers, maintain lamp/lens/overall build quality of the 004 without resorting to mechanical devices, it would be worthy of consideration.

I wonder if they will reuse the chassis of the 004?

I do wish that those tricked up (out) units were available to look at. This is my opinion. Smart manufacturers would make sure that there were rooms or homes where their best could be viewed in an optimized state in every way including the room. There ,those who are really looking for what the best can do could look and then feel comfortable writing checks. I saw my projector twice at CEDIA then here before buying. This sort of thing isn't there often enough.

One of my reasons for not going with DPI was the out right "I wouldn't go that big with this projector" comment by Mark Bradley at CEDIA when I said I wanted to used a 14' wide screen.

Art

Was that the Titan 250 you were considering Art? Did you ever consider the Titan 500?

Hi everyone. Would the C3X 1080p work well on a 8 ft wide 1.5 gain screen from 17-20 feet back or would I need a lower gain screen? Thanks Greg

Was that the Titan 250 you were considering Art? Did you ever consider the Titan 500?

No, because ,at least when I was shopping ,the 500 had a much lower on/of CR spec being quoted.

Art

Hi everyone. Would the C3X 1080p work well on a 8 ft wide 1.5 gain screen from 17-20 feet back or would I need a lower gain screen? Thanks Greg

Check the possible lamp settings. What screen manufacturer ?

Art

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

So what size Stewart Screen are you going to and which one ??? :confused:

Terry

Art, I have a Stewart Ultramatte 150 54 by 96 (eight feet wide). I used to have a Grayhawk .85 gain. I should have kept it instead I sold it a few years back. Thanks Greg

So what size Stewart Screen are you going to and which one ??? :confused:

Terry

TBD pending an onsite evaluation

size somewhere b/n 110-120 inch

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

Well,I don't know about the rest of these guys but I'm right.;) At least based on my own experience with SIM and my HT 5000 projector I believe you will be very very pleased with the images.

Art

Well,I don't know about the rest of these guys but I'm right.;) At least based on my own experience with SIM and my HT 5000 projector I believe you will be very very pleased with the images.

Art

Thanks Art

It was really based on all of your knowledge and going to school on your putt that I sealed the deal

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

oneobgyn
Congratulations, I don't think you'll be unhappy with the Sim2 product based on what I've seen. You may just have the ultimate AV room after pairing them with the new X2's! All that's left is a pair of ML3's and you may be prepared to enjoy your retirement years...... :D

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

I haven't always used Sim2's, and if they didn't perform, I'd dump them in a second. I currently use 3, the HT5000 the HT3000 (soon to be swapped out for a C3X1080) and an HT380. In thier class, all three are stellar performers. I think at the moment Sim2 are mounting a fairly astute assault on the market at the higher end of all thier segments. The support and updating (software and hardware) honestly leaves everyone in their wake. Look at the Evo updates as an example of continued product. The onboard VP in all models is way ahead of the competition and renders an external VP pointless.

Of the 3, its the HT380 thats actually the standout due to the performance of the new technology and the closing of the gap between 1 and 3 chip.

I expect to be floored by the C3X1080 very soon.

coldmachine

any news when sim2 will use dv4 with the ht5000?

thanks
Mike

cm

Do you know if the video processing is the same for the line or if certain Sim2's within the lineup have better VP than others? We did see some benefits on a albeit brief and not exhaustive A/B with utilizing my Crystalio2 on the 3000e vs the onboard VP. Fleshtones especially were more natural in appearance using C2. Also 24p was smoother and more fluid. My preference by far was having the C2 in the mix. Again, this was not an exhaustive comparison which I think some here have undertaken.

cm

Do you know if the video processing is the same for the line or if certain Sim2's within the lineup have better VP than others? We did see some benefits on a albeit brief and not exhaustive A/B with utilizing my Crystalio2 on the 3000e vs the onboard VP. Fleshtones especially were more natural in appearance using C2. Also 24p was smoother and more fluid. My preference by far was having the C2 in the mix. Again, this was not an exhaustive comparison which I think some here have undertaken.

Myself, Alan and others have used the best VPs going and found they offered nothing. When your colors are acurate a VP can do no more on that issue, the CMS renders that issue moot anyway. Scaling and deinterlacing are as good as available anywhere, scaling in particular being outstanding. I have used a C2 extensively, so know it well. Art also uses no VP on account of the internal processing.

All my machines handle 24p perfectly correctly, there is utterly no judder whatsoever, the way its handled doesnt lend itself to be made smoother and more fluid. In fact its one of the simplest tasks to carry pout cleanly.

Its also possible you prefer the look of your VP but that doesnt mean its a correct image.

How deeply did you explore the options on the 3000e? What biasing did you use for the unishape waveforms? How well do you know the various menu options and what they do? Are you sure you hat is set up correctly and optimally?

The algorithms are the same over the range, but some machines have additional modules.

Hope this helps

I expect to be floored by the C3X1080 very soon.

Me also!!!!!!!:D

coldmachine

any news when sim2 will use dv4 with the ht5000?

thanks
Mike

Next year.

Of course that begs the question: Will we be able to upgrade our HT5000's for anything like a resonable price?

I would like t know more about the C3X1080 XE.... I gotta have lumens for my 14' wide microperf scope

I hope that all you guys are correct about the new Sim PJ's. Finally after all of the years spent redoing my audio side of the room I am finally redoing the video end and have on order the new Sim H2 C3X 1080 as well as a new Stewart screen, processor and BluRay player. I never thought I was going to get back in the game but stay tuned.

Steve,

You just might think about changing the color of your all white room to bring out the best of this projector.

^^^
I second the motion.

Myself, Alan and others have used the best VPs going and found they offered nothing. When your colors are acurate a VP can do no more on that issue, the CMS renders that issue moot anyway. Scaling and deinterlacing are as good as available anywhere, scaling in particular being outstanding. I have used a C2 extensively, so know it well. Art also uses no VP on account of the internal processing.

All my machines handle 24p perfectly correctly, there is utterly no judder whatsoever, the way its handled doesnt lend itself to be made smoother and more fluid. In fact its one of the simplest tasks to carry pout cleanly.

Its also possible you prefer the look of your VP but that doesnt mean its a correct image.

How deeply did you explore the options on the 3000e? What biasing did you use for the unishape waveforms? How well do you know the various menu options and what they do? Are you sure you hat is set up correctly and optimally?

The algorithms are the same over the range, but some machines have additional modules.

Hope this helps

How about using an external VP for noise reduction? I find my C3X-E to be have a lot of mosquito noise!

How about using an external VP for noise reduction? I find my C3X-E to be have a lot of mosquito noise!

Are you sure this isn't source related ? Besides NR is evil anyway.:D

Art

Myself, Alan and others have used the best VPs going and found they offered nothing. When your colors are acurate a VP can do no more on that issue, the CMS renders that issue moot anyway. Scaling and deinterlacing are as good as available anywhere, scaling in particular being outstanding. I have used a C2 extensively, so know it well. Art also uses no VP on account of the internal processing.

All my machines handle 24p perfectly correctly, there is utterly no judder whatsoever, the way its handled doesnt lend itself to be made smoother and more fluid. In fact its one of the simplest tasks to carry pout cleanly.

Its also possible you prefer the look of your VP but that doesnt mean its a correct image.

How deeply did you explore the options on the 3000e? What biasing did you use for the unishape waveforms? How well do you know the various menu options and what they do? Are you sure you hat is set up correctly and optimally?

The algorithms are the same over the range, but some machines have additional modules.

Hope this helps
Interesting. I use an HDPRO Lumagen with my 004. It's video processing is superior to the 004, and I have a Pioneer DVD player that's modded for SDI which the HDPRO handles. The Pioneer via the SDI/HDPRO interface is superior in every way to my Blu-ray and HD-DVD player when it comes to upconverting SD DVD. I don't want to lose this important functionality.

I can confirm the internal processing in the Sim is first class all the way. The only benefit to using an external VP would be to gain more inputs ( unless your using the 5000 8 HDMI inputs:) ) with switching and a few obscure features such as chroma delay and audio follow switching etc. I have the Lumagen and the C2 and I find a better image going direct to the projector but I am still using a VP for my additional switching needs.

The only benefit to using an external VP would be to gain more inputs ( unless your using the 5000 8 HDMI inputs:) ) with switching and a few obscure features such as chroma delay and audio follow switching etc.

Wow, you always seem to get the special things Alan... last time I checked, the HT5000 had 6 HDMI inputs. ;)

Anyway, I personally prefer an external VP as well. While the internals are certainly not too shabby, an external VP adds a little extra detail. But that also depends on the source format. There really is no need for an external VP if you feed native res in the first place.

As far as the noise reduction goes, that is a bad thing indeed. There is always some loss of details with noise reduction.

Wow, you always seem to get the special things Alan... last time I checked, the HT5000 had 6 HDMI inputs. ;)

Anyway, I personally prefer an external VP as well. While the internals are certainly not too shabby, an external VP adds a little extra detail. But that also depends on the source format. There really is no need for an external VP if you feed native res in the first place.

As far as the noise reduction goes, that is a bad thing indeed. There is always some loss of details with noise reduction.

Stephan,
Do you have some experience comparing the HT5000 internal processor to an external one on that unit. The reason I say that is the processing is exceptionally clean and artifact free and running HDDVD patterns as well as those on the Spears discs there is full 1080 x 1920 resolution appreantly no or no detrimental filtering noted.

I've run both the CII and Radiance into the HT5000 and got the following results:

VERY minor detail improvements in standard DVD (through Kaleidescape), sometimes not noticeable. Most noticeable improvements were old movie transfers (Casablanca, NBNW, etc,).

Minor improvements in standard (non-HD) Dish material. (Slightly better noise reduction without having to invoke the NR in the 5000)

No noticeable improvement in any of the HD formats. Overall, completely satsisfied with the level of VP produced by the 5000.

Jim

I guess I need to add my Radiance to my for sale list.......

I guess I need to add my Radiance to my for sale list.......

Those VP's are both excellent (I give the nod to the Radiance), but for reasons stated by others it may be difficult to justify having either with the Sim2's. Although not required for the HT5000 (6-hdmi inputs), they make good switches.:D

Jim

My own experience is with about thirty pre-1950 SD DVDs on the 5000. It is definitely at least as clean and detailed as my 9" CRT stacked system with the Faroudja 5000 I used. No artifacting, extreme details that really push the capability of the format, just gorgeous. This evening I watched The Woman in the Window with Edward G. Robinson and I was just awed throughout how clean it was.

Anyway, I just don't see any reason for an outboard processor with this device. But I guess, at least for SD, it could warrent a look but it is so gorgeous now !:)

Art

Those VP's are both excellent (I give the nod to the Radiance), but for reasons stated by others it may be difficult to justify having either with the Sim2's. Although not required for the HT5000 (6-hdmi inputs), they make good switches.:D

Jim

That's terrific that a processor is not necessary to optimize video but doesn't the C3X only have 2 HDMI inputs? That really mandates an external solution whether a switch or processor, no? jlglaw, lol, a $5k switch ??? :eek:

Yes seems overkill for a Radiance just to switch, can someone recommend a 5/6 HDMI switch the equivalent of Radiance switching?

jlglaw, lol, a $5k switch ??? :eek:

Hey c'mon, it's only $4K!!:D:D

OK, here's a loaded question.
I've had 5 HD displays in my theater since 1998.
I've outgrown each one.
I thought the 004 was it, but I was wrong - it has the lumens I need, the sharpness I demand, the color I expect, but it lacks in both On/Off and ANSI contrast.

Will a 3 chip FP like the new Sim2 give me everything I want, so I can retire from the upgrade game for at least 5 years? I mean, what other 'noticeable' improvements could there be? Has the FP technology finally reached a plateau?

Yes seems overkill for a Radiance just to switch, can someone recommend a 5/6 HDMI switch the equivalent of Radiance switching?

The normal answer on this forum is: "Check out the Gefen switches." They have a 6x2 (6 hdmi inputs, 2 outputs) and a recently released 8x1. (gefen.com)

My guys have used them very successfully on several installs, but there are other solutions and I'm sure other owners will post recommendations.

Jim

OK, here's a loaded question.
I've had 5 HD displays in my theater since 1998.
I've outgrown each one.
I thought the 004 was it, but I was wrong - it has the lumens I need, the sharpness I demand, the color I expect, but it lacks in both On/Off and ANSI contrast.

Will a 3 chip FP like the new Sim2 give me everything I want, so I can retire from the upgrade game for at least 5 years? I mean, what other 'noticeable' improvements could there be? Has the FP technology finally reached a plateau?

Obviously we are heading toward 4K systems, maybe lasers(?), but short of that I don't know how much better my viewing experience with the HT5000 can be. My eyes can only see so much (age related according to my wife (she's 20 years younger:D)), so I'm feeling pretty good about this setup for the next several years (but I said that about the Ruby as well, and I'm not sure where that PJ is at the moment:o). I don't think I'd commit to 5 years unless I stayed on the audio side of this forum.:)

Jim

Alright, here is a question for you folks with experience with the 5000. I am doing an installation that will include a C3X 1080 projecting on a 13 foot wide screen, (16X9). Almost assuredly there will an issue concerning lack of ‘fire power’ on such a large screen. The plan is to move to a 5000 as soon as the next upgrade of that unit occurs, (dark 4?). So here is the question; what screen do I recommend now so as to avoid having to replace it when the upgrade occurs? The expectation is that the C3X will be in place for less than one year.

Regards,

I think Alan said the XE vesion of the C3X will do more lumens.

Stephan,
Do you have some experience comparing the HT5000 internal processor to an external one on that unit. The reason I say that is the processing is exceptionally clean and artifact free and running HDDVD patterns as well as those on the Spears discs there is full 1080 x 1920 resolution appreantly no or no detrimental filtering noted.

Art,

I'm not saying that you get artifacts with the HT5000 (at least I have seen none yet) or that it can't fully resolve 1080p. My findings are similar to what Jim already stated. Depending on your source, there is more detail visible. If that last bit of performance is worth the price of a VP to you, is up to you of course. :)


Will a 3 chip FP like the new Sim2 give me everything I want, so I can retire from the upgrade game for at least 5 years?

Honestly? No, but that also depends on what you want... there are some things the C3X1080 does better than the HT5000 and there are things the HT5000 does better than the C3X1080. So you always have to to choose what you want. Future projectors will be brighter and have higher on/off CR. The specs for the announced PD M80 already say 8000 lumens and 50k:1 on/off CR. I'll believe that when I see it. :D
I do believe that over 5000 lumens and 10k:1 is possible though.


I am doing an installation that will include a C3X 1080 projecting on a 13 foot wide screen, (16X9). Almost assuredly there will an issue concerning lack of ‘fire power’ on such a large screen.

Out of curiosity, but in what environment do you plan to watch movies? With open windows, during the day or do you just like to wear sunglasses while watching a movie? ;)

I personally think the C3X1080 is more than bright enough for a 13' wide screen. But then again, I don't need 20 ftL to watch a movie. If you really need the extra brightness, you should consider to buy a HT5000 now and have it upgraded to DC4 once that upgrade is available.

I think Alan said the XE vesion of the C3X will do more lumens.

Ok, I'm lost. Are you reffering to the C3X-E? That's not the new C3X1080. The C3X1080 is the new entry model 1080p 3-chip DLP. The C3X-E on the other hand is a upgraded version of the C3X that offers better CR and more brightness, but it's still a 720p projector.

As far as I know, there is no official word on a possible C3X1080-E yet, but maybe Alan or Cold have some more info on this.

Ok, I'm lost. Are you reffering to the C3X-E? That's not the new C3X1080. The C3X1080 is the new entry model 1080p 3-chip DLP. The C3X-E on the other hand is a upgraded version of the C3X that offers better CR and more brightness, but it's still a 720p projector.

As far as I know, there is no official word on a possible C3X1080-E yet, but maybe Alan or Cold have some more info on this.

I believe Alan told me they are doing a 1080P version as well. He could comment on this.

AFAIK, the C3Xe (3x720p) and the C3X1080 use the same lamp. 250w dimmable. Both are new models.

The HT5000 is 300w.

Will a 3 chip FP like the new Sim2 give me everything I want, so I can retire from the upgrade game for at least 5 years?

Sure, if you leave the forum and come back early 2013... ;)

The E designates the 10bit upgrade path in the previous 720 C3X and the earlier 1080 models. Knowing the HT5000 and the new 1080C3X had/have this from the start I do not think the 1080 C3X has the E signature. I do not know for sure..Maybe cold has the answer?

I believe Alan told me they are doing a 1080P version as well. He could comment on this.

Jeff,
Since you missed my meet this year you might want to get a Saturday afternoon and come over for an hour or two. I believe that you could get an excellent feel for what you might want. If the 5000 is coming with a DC4 then I'd wait but with gamma control settings it really does look quite good now.

Art

The E designates the 10bit upgrade path in the previous 720 C3X and the earlier 1080 models. Knowing the HT5000 and the new 1080C3X had/have this from the start I do not think the 1080 C3X has the E signature. I do not know for sure..Maybe cold has the answer?

No need for an E with the C3X1080. All models from HT380 onwards dont need to have E suffixes, its in there, as required.

In addition to what has been said already, I don't think there will be a C3X1080-pro either. The C3X-pro has significantly more light output than the C3X-E, which is now the standard C3X model from what I can tell. The old C3X is not availble anymore.

In addition to what has been said already, I don't think there will be a C3X1080-pro either. The C3X-pro has significantly more light output than the C3X-E, which is now the standard C3X model from what I can tell. The old C3X is not availble anymore.

I just ordered the C3X pro to replace my C3Xe. Ill be able to cook breakfast on my screen :)

I just ordered the C3X pro to replace my C3Xe. Ill be able to cook breakfast on my screen :)

How many lumens does that push out? What wattage?

Cheers

The C3X Pro is 720P... Is there a 1080P version??

Art,

Regardless of when I get a PJ, I'd like to come up and see that set up..

But I would like to see it before I buy!

Thanks for the offer!

I did not ask about the bulb but it is 40% brighter. Thats a good kick in brightness. After a few hundred hours on the bulb it should settle into what the C3Xe looks like with a brand new bulb.

Jeff I do not know if there will be a Pro version of the 1080, to early in the release chain. It could happen I guess.

The Runcos retail is 200k. I agree at that price I would prefer to go the extra mile and get the Barco unless there were a feature limitation restricting the choice to one or the other.

Hi Alan,

I think that the Vx-55 retails for 100k. Although I expect a tricked out (thanks Art) DP1500 to be about 30k more, it is still a steal. Hell one could refinance the old homestead and write off the interest payments. These projectors are definetely not in the same league. The Barco is to projectors what the Bugatti Veyron is to GT.
http://voip-blog.tmcnet.com/blog/rich-tehrani/uploads/bugatti-veyron-big.jpg

If we use the Battle of the Bulge analogy : The Barco is the Tiger 2 and the VX-55 is the Sherman Tank.

http://www.wpclipart.com/armed_services/tanks/Sherman_Tank_WW2.png "It's like hitting them with tennis balls" Sherman tank commander BOTB.

http://cineramax.com/images/Tiger2DP1500.jpg

I have asked to see if in fact the gal that designs all of the Barco projectors in Kuurne (not far from the Ardenness forrest - where reportedly 13 Tiger 2 tanks were abandoned) was in any way shape or form inspired by the industrial design of the Tiger 2.

The resemblance is uncanny. Like the Tiger 2 in it's time the Barco DP1500 represents a paradygm shift, setting a new standard for ways doing things.

I forgot this is a cx-3 thread, well, the analogy would be a Bazooka. :D

How many lumens does that push out? What wattage?

4000 ansi lumens with a 250W bulb, dimmable to 200W.

I forgot this is a cx-3 thread, well, the analogy would be a Bazooka. :D

Isn't that used to "take out" those tanks?:D

Jim

For my screen size, I need a minimum of 2000 lumens (14' 2.40 scope Microperf Studio tek)...What are the 1080P options?

Does anybody know for sure that the ANSI lumens rating for the new C3x 1080 is 2000?

Alan. Are you going to stack your Dwin CRT with your new digital. I don't think anyone has ever done a CRT/digital stack. A definite place in the Guiness book of HT world records if you do it.


Bland. You were missed at Art's meet.

For my screen size, I need a minimum of 2000 lumens (14' 2.40 scope Microperf Studio tek)...What are the 1080P options?

What makes you think you need 2000 lumens min? Is it just your personal taste to have an extremely bright image?

With a 14' wide 2.40 screen, you're looking at a 10.4'x5.8' 16:9 area (you have to calculate the brightness for the 16:9 area of your screen if you use an anamorphic lens, not the 2.40 area), which would give you roughly 60sqft.

Let's assume your screen has a little loss due to perforation and an effective gain of 1. That would give you about 33 ftL! That should be more than bright enough. Scratch off another 20% to 30% for the anamorphic lens, that would still give you over 20 ftL.

Now, the C3X1080 won't be 2000 lumens, so you might put that into the equation. If it's not bright enough for you, your options are the HT5000 or to get yourself on the waiting list for the DP Titan Reference 1080p. It's rated 6000 lumens and 5000:1 on/off CR. So, basically a HT5000 just alot brighter. The PD M80 is another option. Besides that, you'd be making trade offs when it comes to on/off CR.


Does anybody know for sure that the ANSI lumens rating for the new C3x 1080 is 2000?

It's rated over 2000. But we all know once properly calibrated it won't hit that. My guess would be 1300 to 1500. We'll see once the first production units are out.

Thanks, Stephen. Actually, I want about 18 ft lamberts and 2000 lumens came up in my calculations as well...I'm not sure how much brightness is lost with an anmorphic lens and light loss from a Microperf is 10% (so overall gain is ~1.2).

I would certainly look at the HT 5000 but if I could do it for less cost and get a smaller projector, I'd be happy. My PJ room is tight.

I was hoping for a hi power 1080P version of the Cs3-E...

We figure 1.1 to 1.15 for a perfed ST 130.

For my screen size, I need a minimum of 2000 lumens (14' 2.40 scope Microperf Studio tek)...What are the 1080P options?

Jeff,
Your options right now are all three chip DLP.

Christie
Barco
DPI
SIM
Runco


Art

We figure 1.1 to 1.15 for a perfed ST 130.

The numbers thrown around are seven to ten percent loss through the perfs so that puts it right around 1.2 nominal gain.

Art

Yea no question you don't need 2000 lumens and also no question once calibrated the numbers take a nose dive.

I'm getting 22fL on the same screen. With the lights down some say too bright but I think it just looks spectacular.

I don't know where the 30% loss in using the ISCO comes from unless you mean 30% due to all of the realestate being used (1/d squared) otherwise it is only a couple of percent.


Art

I talked to Stewart today about a 144" wide 2.40 perfed ST 130 and the gain I was given was 1.15. Maybe I got it wrong. I'll check again tomorrow.

Alan. Are you going to stack your Dwin CRT with your new digital. I don't think anyone has ever done a CRT/digital stack.

This reminds me, I remember a training course I took many years ago where they were setting up a CRT and used a digital to shot a cross hatch on the screen for reference geometry.

I don't know where the 30% loss in using the ISCO comes from unless you mean 30% due to all of the realestate being used (1/d squared) otherwise it is only a couple of percent.

Nono, the ISCOIII is closer to 20% (actually between 15% and 20%), but other lenses are not as good. On the ISCOIII it also depends on the revision and they're yet working on another revision of the ISCOIII which should be out early next year. Have you measured how much light output the ISCO is eating up? I'd be surprised if it is only a few percent.


There is also the choice of 1-chip DLPs of course, there are some units outputting a huge amount of lumens (>3000). But of course this will introduce other issues such as rainbows and so on. But then again, if one is not sensitive to rainbows and just wants to kill some time until more 3-chips arrive, a 1-chip might be worth to consider. Depending on configuration, the DP iVision30 is capable of over 3000 lumens and should be in the sub $10k range (I'm not quite sure on the US price).

Will a 3 chip FP like the new Sim2 give me everything I want, so I can retire from the upgrade game for at least 5 years? I mean, what other 'noticeable' improvements could there be? Has the FP technology finally reached a plateau?
No. You can use a lot more On-Off contrast with the right room and material. The rest is probably about as good as one can hope for with 1080p.

Yea no question you don't need 2000 lumens and also no question once calibrated the numbers take a nose dive.

I'm getting 22fL on the same screen. With the lights down some say too bright but I think it just looks spectacular.

I don't know where the 30% loss in using the ISCO comes from unless you mean 30% due to all of the realestate being used (1/d squared) otherwise it is only a couple of percent.


Art

art
the isco3 drop about 2-3% light not more.

reason why many people here at avs report about a hug drop when using
the isco is that most consumer pr. are drop a lot light out when
you decreas the picture size with the zoom optic.(ruby pearl till 40% reduc.)

i report this in details long time ago at avs.

so most people not change the pr. location when using try or measuring
the light with the isco and without.

THE ZOOM OPTIC DROP THE LIGHT OUT NOT THE ISCO

btw.isco specifies max. -3%.

i found it out when i had my qualia and try the isco 3.
i found only 10% more light and after i call isco they told me the reason.
than i change my short lens to the medium and thats it.
from this time on i have about 30% more light with 2.35 format movies.

now a good news for you me and all that have a pr. that have a
professionall lens that the sim2 5000 also have.

the design of the optic is very different from consumer zoom lens.
that why they are very big and expensive.

this optic design not drop light when you change your
zoom ratio.:)
this kind of optics have all the time(min. and max. zoom range)
the same light output.

for the price of your 5000 lens you can get 3 or4 full hd lcd pr.
but most of the time such expensive lenses have a lot more to
offer not just this advantage about no drop light out when
change zoom ratio they are also very sharp and and and.


so the only 3 chip dlp pr. that will have this drop is the new small
sim2 3 chip because its a consumer zomm lens inside.

but many times that drop consumer zoom lenes have can be avoid by shifting the pr. more close to the
screen to use the max. short zoom ratio the optic offers when you like to use a isco3.

and btw i also like 22 ftl.
i can go to about 36 ftl but thats to bright at least for me.
i have a friend that have a qualia and he not understand me why i not use the full light out my pr.
offers.
i told him that i like it in the 20 ftl range.
so interesting to know you like it as well.

No, because ,at least when I was shopping ,the 500 had a much lower on/of CR spec being quoted.

Art

We have had an DPI HD500 1080p on order for some time now. It seemed like we really needed the lumens with a 54 by 127 Starglas involved.The 250 seemed a little underpowered and the customer was willing to pony up.
There is a High Contrast lens we are going to try as well.
Anyone receive a HD250 or 500 as yet?
The rep just indicated we should have the projector by the end of the month. Hopefully that is true.

Nono, the ISCOIII is closer to 20% (actually between 15% and 20%), but other lenses are not as good. On the ISCOIII it also depends on the revision and they're yet working on another revision of the ISCOIII which should be out early next year. Have you measured how much light output the ISCO is eating up? I'd be surprised if it is only a few percent.


That not correct at all. I have measured the light drop with my ISCOIII and it was 2%. 20% is utter shite.

art
the isco3 drop about 2-3% light not more.

reason why many people here at avs report about a hug drop when using
the isco is that most consumer pr. are drop a lot light out when
you decreas the picture size with the zoom optic.(ruby pearl till 40% reduc.)

i report this in details long time ago at avs.

so most people not change the pr. location when using try or measuring
the light with the isco and without.

THE ZOOM OPTIC DROP THE LIGHT OUT NOT THE ISCO

btw.isco specifies max. -3%.

i found it out when i had my qualia and try the isco 3.
i found only 10% more light and after i call isco they told me the reason.
than i change my short lens to the medium and thats it.
from this time on i have about 30% more light with 2.35 format movies.

now a good news for you me and all that have a pr. that have a
professionall lens that the sim2 5000 also have.

the design of the optic is very different from consumer zoom lens.
that why they are very big and expensive.

this optic design not drop light when you change your
zoom ratio.:)
this kind of optics have all the time(min. and max. zoom range)
the same light output.

for the price of your 5000 lens you can get 3 or4 full hd lcd pr.
but most of the time such expensive lenses have a lot more to
offer not just this advantage about no drop light out when
change zoom ratio they are also very sharp and and and.


so the only 3 chip dlp pr. that will have this drop is the new small
sim2 3 chip because its a consumer zomm lens inside.

but many times that drop consumer zoom lenes have can be avoid by shifting the pr. more close to the
screen to use the max. short zoom ratio the optic offers when you like to use a isco3.

and btw i also like 22 ftl.
i can go to about 36 ftl but thats to bright at least for me.
i have a friend that have a qualia and he not understand me why i not use the full light out my pr.
offers.
i told him that i like it in the 20 ftl range.
so interesting to know you like it as well.

This always confuses me, Maximum short zoom ratio, on the t1 lens for the CX31080, 1.3-1.7, the maximum short zoom ratio would be 1.3, is tha correct?

I don't know where the 30% loss in using the ISCO comes from unless you mean 30% due to all of the realestate being used (1/d squared) otherwise it is only a couple of percent.


Art

Hi Art, When I saw the lighting reference with 3000 ansi lumens and 5,000 on off on a 13 foot wide screen at the show I was marveled how great the image looked without the anmorphic Isco 3 engaged. Then the automated show system deployed the Isco 3 in front of it and retained the same image of some red theater curtains with gold fringe and bullions. I was shocked to feel what felt at the moment as a 30% loss (I had expected a 20%). Afterwards I posted here that the difference was not subtle, that is when Wolfgang confirmed having clocked a 30% loss with the Christie cinema piece.

I believe the brighter the bulb the greater the loss effect. The angle of alignment affects too.

Wolfgang,
Thanks for the confirmation. I remembered your post and was using that as I recalled it. This means that the dimmer picture is due to the much larger area onto which the image is illuminating ,very little to a reduction in actual light from the lens array.

Art

That's good to know..I have a long throw as well.

Art. You are correct about the perf light loss on a ST130. Stewart says about 10% which would make it 1.17 not 1.15. I wonder why no one has formally measured the actual difference. What's a few lumens between friends?

Art. You are correct about the perf light loss on a ST130. Stewart says about 10% which would make it 1.17 not 1.15. I wonder why no one has formally measured the actual difference. What's a few lumens between friends?

No doubt !:) All I remember was it was right around 1.2 gain.

Art

That's good to know..I have a long throw as well.

its not about what lens you have a long or short throw lens its
all about in which position you drive your zoom lens that you have inside
max. short or max. long.

its not about what lens you have a long or short throw lens its
all about in which position you drive your zoom lens that you have inside
max. short or max. long.

Gotcha..thanks for the clarification.

Assuming the lens is not constant effective aperture. If a lens as some expensive photographic zoom lenses are (expensive as compared to a non constant aperture zoome) is constant effective aperture, the zoom position would have no effect on the amount of light transmitted. Given the small size of projector zoom lenses, one would think for a $30 to $50K machine, the lens would be constant effective aperture. For this, there would have to be more glass (quantity wise). A fatter lens so to speak.

and btw i also like 22 ftl.
i can go to about 36 ftl but thats to bright at least for me.
i have a friend that have a qualia and he not understand me why i not use the full light out my pr.
offers.
i told him that i like it in the 20 ftl range.
so interesting to know you like it as well.

The original SMPTE illumination standard for film presentation in Movie Theaters WAS going to be 22 ft lamberts. Scientifically it had the necessary amount of light for correct color gamut and depth presentation.

Unfortunately (because film is 24fps) it exhibited to much shutter-judder. They reduced this to 12 foot lamberts as a compromise in order to not see the shutter-judder, but the color depth suffered.

I too design for 22-23 foot lamberts. To me it is the golden zone for video projection.

The original SMPTE illumination standard for film presentation in Movie Theaters WAS going to be 22 ft lamberts. Scientifically it had the necessary amount of light for correct color gamut and depth presentation.

Unfortunately (because film is 24fps) it exhibited to much shutter-judder. They reduced this to 12 foot lamberts as a compromise in order to not see the shutter-judder, but the color depth suffered.

I too design for 22-23 foot lamberts. To me it is the golden zone for video projection.

No doubt it has way more pop than 11 to 12 which is where I was for ten years with my stacks.

Art

What do you guy's think is the ideal screen material to pair with the C3X 1080, assuming that it would be sized right to achieve around 22fl?

I am looking at the Da-Lite materials as well as Stewart.

What do you guy's think is the ideal screen material to pair with the C3X 1080, assuming that it would be sized right to achieve around 22fl?

I am looking at the Da-Lite materials as well as Stewart.

Depends on screen size seating requirements and speaker position.The HP has viewing cone limitations and no acoustically transparent options.

Art

What do you guy's think is the ideal screen material to pair with the C3X 1080, assuming that it would be sized right to achieve around 22fl?

I am looking at the Da-Lite materials as well as Stewart.

In the factory they use Stewart and Da-Lite 1.3 gain, not sure of the name.

Sorry, to clarify:

I already have a High Power, but it is too high gain, so I am looking for a lower gain option that is a smooth and clean as the High Power, or better. My screen size would be around 65x116, and I do NOT want a perfed screen. My speakers are under and to the sides, so I don't need an acoustically transparent surface.

My room is light controlled, with all the important surfaces black.

Sorry, to clarify:

I already have a High Power, but it is too high gain, so I am looking for a lower gain option that is a smooth and clean as the High Power, or better. My screen size would be around 65x116, and I do NOT want a perfed screen. My speakers are under and to the sides, so I don't need an acoustically transparent surface.

My room is light controlled, with all the important surfaces black.

I'd go with something with unity gain then. That screen isn't very large at all and without the loss with AT you have all sorts of options. The other thing to consider is reflections in which case some gray surace screen would be fine.

Art

Is there a best Unity Gain screen? From what I have heard, most of them have coatings that are visible. Is there a best unity gain material, that has the purest, cleanest surface?

Personally, I'd look at this first (default standard)

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Snomatte100.html

Art

Thanks Art, that is the one I am leaning towards. I have a sample of that, and Da-Lites similar product on the way. :)

Thanks Art, that is the one I am leaning towards. I have a sample of that, and Da-Lites similar product on the way. :)

I would get something like a GreyHawk III instead, especially consider the size of the screen.

I am not a big fan of grey screens. I had a Firehawk, and didn't like what it did to the image.

What did it do? I am curious because we test opened a multiple aspect ratio Firehawk III system this morning in a Master Bedroom under construction with just the metal studs and no projector. I and the King Of Miami were quite shocked as to how grey that screen is. For a while we thought they had shipped him the wrong screen (grey hawk). I spoke to Stewart and they said not to worry that whites will be white and no silver artifacting will happen.

I think that some type of disclaimer or electronic swatch should be displayed on their website, to prevent situations like this. Quite frankly I saw the firehaWK 3 AT cedia FIRED UP WITH A SONY PROJECTOR AND UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES it looked like a white screen to me. Time will tell. Stewart claims that the new firehawk has a higher resolution than the ST 130 g3. Which I think would have preferred. I normally detest grey front projection screens.

Here are some pics, ther real star of the show is the bric controller that has precise top bottom positions for 5 aspect ratios. I (and the owner) still wish the firehawk wasn't this grey.

http://cineramax.com/images/Prometheus-MB1.jpg

http://cineramax.com/images/Prometheus-MB2.jpg


And 2.76 for Mutiny on the Bounty and Ben Hur.
http://cineramax.com/images/Prometheus-MB3.jpg

Well,, my experience was with the older Firehawk, so it may be better with the new one, but I found the image to lack pop. It seemed to be muted. It wasn't that whites didn't look white, but it just seemed to restrain things a bit too much.

Also, the viewing angle was not good vertically. It dropped off way too much for my front row.

Stewart claims that the new firehawk has a higher resolution than the ST 130 g3. Which I think would have preferred.


Resolution?

Art

Resolution? I think what Peter might mean is a smoother finish which would allow better focusing of a 1080p picture. This probably is not important with a single lens projector because of the substantial depth of field in front of and behind the actual screen surface. But add a second lens in front to horizontally stretch the image and depth of field goes to almost zero and a smoother surface and a curved screen will help ontain good focus accross the screen.

And for those who might not have met Peter in person, Art and I spent some time with him at a Cedia party and he is one good guy and very knowledgeable. He is oppionated but hey so is Art.:)

What do you think of the Stewart Ultramatte 1.5 gain with the C3X 1080p or C3Xe from 17-22ft back range. It would be on 110 diagonal screen. Would the image be to bright?

What do you think of the Stewart Ultramatte 1.5 gain with the C3X 1080p or C3Xe from 17-22ft back range. It would be on 110 diagonal screen. Would the image be to bright?

you looking at around 38 fl if we assume the c3x 1080p put out 1200 lumens after calibration.

So would the general consensus be for a screen width of 12-14' wide, with light control, be for AT Ultra Matte 130 gain, for non AT Snomatte 1.0 gain?

I thought CM posted Sim2 was testing the CX31080 with 130 gain?

Resolution? I think what Peter might mean is a smoother finish which would allow better focusing of a 1080p picture. This probably is not important with a single lens projector because of the substantial depth of field in front of and behind the actual screen surface. But add a second lens in front to horizontally stretch the image and depth of field goes to almost zero and a smoother surface and a curved screen will help ontain good focus accross the screen.

And for those who might not have met Peter in person, Art and I spent some time with him at a Cedia party and he is one good guy and very knowledgeable. He is oppionated but hey so is Art.:)

Thanks for the kind words Mark, but in reality I am not that experienced in regular diffusion screens, Optical screens (Torusses and Rear Screens) yes because I prefer them for serious applications, I generally don't find the differences in the regular FP screens so significant to impact effectiveness in a competent way, but here you go, had I known the Firehawk was grey ...

For acoustically transparent screens (which are of value in some rooms) being a hair past unity gain helps. In the Helene room the Barco VAR insisted on the SMX due to flat field and spectral response, as well as audio transparency.

I don't know where the 30% loss in using the ISCO comes from ...


Hi Art,

It is not experienced as a 30% light loss but a 30% ANSI contrast loss. And it was very easy to see on the lighting reference that was projecting 5,000 on/off but with 2.5-3k plus ansi lumens at D65. The difference was huge.

Is the consensus that the C3X1080 will probably be 1200 calibrated (2000 spec) lumens on High (250w) or would that be with the lamp set on low (200w)?

So would the general consensus be for a screen width of 12-14' wide, with light control, be for AT Ultra Matte 130 gain, for non AT Snomatte 1.0 gain?

I thought CM posted Sim2 was testing the CX31080 with 130 gain?

Thats correct, they also use unity gain.

I was goingto order a Firehawk for my 14' wide screen.....but no Firehawk microperf in a screen that size.

Why not Jeff? Stewart says special orders don't upset us. If they can make a Firehawk screen that size, they can surely perf it. The perfing is done by one individual using a special machine and die. If you want it, I'll get it for you.

Did you see this I edit-added upstream on this thread.

http://cineramax.com/images/Prometheus-MB2.jpg

I think it is too grey for a dedicated cinema.

Peter. Who gives a fecal about the color of the screen before the picture is turned on. Its the results reflecting an image back at you that count. Originally movie screens were silver. Going to white, that would be too white? Whatever gives thebest results is all the counts. You want tuna with good taste or tuna which tastes good?

LOL! I have serious reservations about a greyish cast making a typical "parade scene" look like the "return of the living dead". The king of miami was pissed last Thursday, hell my head could roll, ;). There is some history to this. When this guy bought his first Torus screen in 1993 it arrived incorrectly in silver 3-d, both him and I hated what it did to the picture, in fact I complained to Don and he specially formulated a 2.8 gain off-white-beige surface that the then prince of Miami absolutely loved and with which he went on to impress the international jet set to increase his status and multiply his millions, and all because of a change from grey to beige. :D

It is my fault as a consultant for not noticing at CEDIA that the Firehawk g3 was grey when turned on, I should have looked more carefully , but the POS SONY LCOS image got nauseatingly in the way (oh Sony , blocking the intersection yet again). I am expecting a memo from Stewart clearly stating why and how the Firehawk g3 differs from the silver 3-d and greyhawk in order for it not to cast "the return of the living dead skin effect".

We will see how this little drama plays, just another minor subplot in the saga. The KOM will rip that sh_t out in a minute, like he did to his old apartment's AMX system to try crestron on a whim, because everyone had it (only later to revert back to AMX for the new castle).

Why not Jeff? Stewart says special orders don't upset us. If they can make a Firehawk screen that size, they can surely perf it. The perfing is done by one individual using a special machine and die. If you want it, I'll get it for you.

No...I inquired about a Microperf Firehawk, but not at that size.. Something aobut angling the screen into the perforator....(?)

That would imply that any screen wider than x can't be microperfed.

After initial setup and calibration of the cx31080, is calibration required as the lamp dims, is calibration neccesary when replacing the lamp down the road.

So when will recalibration be neccesary after intial setup?

Technically the red value will drop quite often (200-250 hours). Do you have a photo research handy?

Otherwise don't bother, use the factory setting. Change the bulb more frequently.

There is a new Vidikron out which is a 3 chip 1080P with a 1.2 kwatt Xenon lamp source.

It puts out 6000 Ansi lumens and 3600 CMS lumens

Martin Sorcese owns a Vidikron and says they come as close to film as he has ever seen in a Digital projector. He does not say what projector he owns.

mlang, any idea of the price of admission on this projector?

There is a new Vidikron out which is a 3 chip 1080P with a 1.2 kwatt Xenon lamp source.

It puts out 6000 Ansi lumens and 3600 CMS lumens

Martin Sorcese owns a Vidikron and says they come as close to film as he has ever seen in a Digital projector. He does not say what projector he owns.

There is a new Vidikron out which is a 3 chip 1080P with a 1.2 kwatt Xenon lamp source.

It puts out 6000 Ansi lumens and 3600 CMS lumens

Martin Sorcese owns a Vidikron and says they come as close to film as he has ever seen in a Digital projector. He does not say what projector he owns.


And Michael Jordan wears Hanes underwear, Tiger Woods drives a Buick....

And Michael Jordan wears Hanes underwear, Tiger Woods drives a Buick....

Tiger promoting Buick??? I thouight you had to be 70 or older to drive a Buick??

mlang, any idea of the price of admission on this projector?

It can be all yours for just short of what it would cost to buy a small house in Nebraska

And Michael Jordan wears Hanes underwear, Tiger Woods drives a Buick....

What sneakers does MIchael Jordan wear on the basketball court and what clubs
does Tiger Woods use when he Plays the Masters

Tiger Wood uses as do all pro's use custom fit, custom flex, custom lie, custom etc., the only thing that is not custom or specially fitted is the Logo

Tiger Wood uses as do all pro's use custom fit, custom flex, custom lie, custom etc., the only thing that is not custom or specially fitted is the Logo

and a Vidikron projector with a 1.2kwatt xenon lamp is the projector equivalent of those clubs.

Have you been to Martin's house to watch movies with him?

Oh and Michael J wears the brand that pays him/Chicago Bulls an endorsement fee to wear

There is a new Vidikron out which is a 3 chip 1080P with a 1.2 kwatt Xenon lamp source.

We nned to be VERY SPCEIFIC as to the nature of the 1.2 kw xenon lamp. On one end of the spectrum you have the highly controversial CERMAX, and at the opposite end in ultimate perfermance accomplishment there are new digital cinema lamps with outstanding focus and unmatched efficiency.

So in the future if it is is CERMAX that the op is commenting on then identify it for what it is, or alternatively for WHAT IT'S NOT.

I have a strong Bias against the former Vidikron company, I had many problems with their projector/s and the customer service was less than stellar.

In fatc the projectors kept blowing the power module and they tried to blame it on my electrical wiring....

I have one sitting in the basement with a bad power supply

We nned to be VERY SPCEIFIC as to the nature of the 1.2 kw xenon lamp. On one end of the spectrum you have the highly controversial CERMAX, and at the opposite end in ultimate perfermance accomplishment there are new digital cinema lamps with outstanding focus and unmatched efficiency.

So in the future if it is is CERMAX that the op is commenting on then identify it for what it is, or alternatively for WHAT IT'S NOT.

I was not aware that the Perkin Elmer Cermax lamps were controversial. Whats the problem with them. I have worked with the quartz lamps up to 15kw and they are scary So I was excited that these lamps were being replaced by ceramic lamps with claimed 4000 hour lifetimes. Sony uses them in the 100 and the 200.

Which new lamps are we talking about.

I was told by a major PJ company looking to implement it in their midsize 3dlp line of projectors that the 1 kw and the 1.2 kw developed I high rate of flicker after 600 hours in their lab testing. Last I checked the Qualia has 50% drop after a couple hundred hours. That is what I consider controversial.

Wolfgang and Robena say that is not the case. Who knows what kind of extreme real world simulation testing they conducted.

I have worked with the quartz lamps up to 15kw and they are scary . Is it just the little implosion potential what made you leary? ;)

Is it just the little implosion potential what made you leary? ;)

oh yea! I was working on a calibration system in graduate school and we used a klystron as the trigger pulse and every time the lamp came on it blew every amplifier and logic circuit I had built into the system. At first you think there is some short in the system but the dam thing was propagating in the air even though it was in a copper cage. Its like putting a radar system in your computer.

You mentioned some other Xenon lamps that you thought were better? Who makes them?

IDK. I don't follow the manufacturer just the technology.They are the type that can implode that are used in the digital cinema units. They have a more stable life than the cermax with light output being more consistent at the end with the output when new.