About 8 months ago I put out a challenge. A challenge to get high end CRT owners to find someone with an RS1 and invite them to their theater for comparison. It went something like this...

If you are a CRT owner with a nice setup and are a bit curious how digital stacks up would you be willing to host an RS1 owner for a night in your theater? This is solely meant to be fun so please lets not start any CRT/Digital wars.

Maybe we can get a few of these "shootouts" throughout the nation and have a good time reporting back what we saw.

I am willing to put one of these together in the Seattle area so if you have a nice CRT setup, and you are willing, I will find a RS1/owner around Seattle and get it over to your house for a night of good times and interesting comparisons.

Any others throughout the US are encouraged to do the same and can use this thread or start your own here or in the ">$3000 digital forum".

Remember... it's all good


Anyway... I never got a high end 9" CRT owner in the Seattle area to accept the challenge. Did anyone else around the nation get a chance to do this? I'd love to hear about the comparisions!

Yes, I saw it at Cliff's place in June.

Both setups had pros and cons. The 82(?) hour RS1 had a nonuniform white field as is known with these units. The colors weren't as nice as the G90. THe G90 stack required massively more setup though, with fairly regular tweaking since it was a stack.

I did like the RS1 over any of the comparable Sony SxRD stuff I've seen to date though. The Ruby and Pearl simply don't compare to the RS1 IMHO. The RS1 is close to the G90 but not quite, with unknown reliability issues since it's a new product.

I have both and RS-1 and a 9500LC Ultra. I have to tell you...I love the RS-1. The CRT without a doubt kills the RS-1 with black level...but the brightness, sharpness and punch to the RS-1 is fantastic. When I first switch between watching something on my 9500 to the RS-1 the first thing I say is wow..but then after a little while the lack of pure black starts to get to me and I end up going back to my CRT. I prefer the RS-1 for animation movies. but prefer the CRT or everything else. I love the RS-1 for video games.

I am very excited for the RS-2 to come out. I know it will only be a minor step up..but a lot of minor steps will eventually release my desire to keep with CRT. BTW I just got a G-90 and and excited to see the difference between the RS-1 and the G90. The G90 throws little bit more light..so I and interested to see if it comes a bit closer the the punch that the RS-1 has.

I have also wondered if I have my RS-1 is too close to the screen which is raising the black level and reducing the contrast. I have heard that the closer you have it that can be an effect. I might try moving it back now that I am making room for the G90.

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!

Instead of being a control freak, why dont you just let people say what they saw.

Instead of being a control freak, why dont you just let people say what they saw.


Hehe, cmon' now Tryg. I'm not trying to "control" anything. Go ahead and do a search for my posts in the 3K and up forum to see my "review" of the RS1.

Two drawbacks since my initial review being slow panels and innacurate colors, but other than that, great little unit.

Oh, and by the way, Happy Thanksgiving!

Cliff

What the hell did cliffy post? My lap top screen is blazing yellow all over the place. Maybe if I put on sun glasses I might be able read what I think he is shouting. I have an RS2 coming in to try. It will leave very shortly since I also have a C3x 1080 coming also. Pperhaps I will still have my 9500LC ultra up to compare it to.

what the hell did cliffy post. My lap top screen is blazing yellow all over the place. maybe if i put on sun glasses I might be able read what I think he is shouting. i have an RS2 coming in to try. It will leave very shortly since I also have a C3x 1080 coming also. perhaps I will still have my 9500LC ultra up to compar it to.

Um, so what do I have to do to convince you for a Miata trip to Northwest Indiana with a couple of projectors in the back seat??????

Please????? :)

Cliffy

iI wil lfix the RS1 color errors with my Lumagen Radiance and Williams new meter or maybe with Tom Huffman's help..

I have seen both but not side by side. IMO, the only reason to go RS1 over a nice 9" is that the RS1 will do 10 feet wide and CIH for only $13k. Of couse I will never have $13K to blow so for me a 9" for half that money is still first choice. I agree with Curt regarding Sony SXRD, even thoguh the RS 1 has it's flaws (like anything else) it is a no-brainer chocie over a Ruby or Pearl with their phony AI contrast specs.

Back seat in a Miata? You would have to seriously modify the chassis of a Miata to add a back seat. Hell its not like modding a 9500LC. Of course UPS could be used instead of a lacking back seat.

Back seat in a Miata?

:confused:

There's no room for a back seat. heck, there's no room for a trunk. And that may explain why they put the glove compartment where a trunk is usually found.

Back seat in a Miata? You would have to seriously modify the chassis of a Miata to add a back seat. Hell its not like modding a 9500LC. Of course UPS could be used instead of a lacking back seat.


Oooohhhhhh, please send one. Please PLEASE!!!! Especially the SIM!

Cliffy

. Of couse I will never have $13K to blow so for me a 9" for half that money is still first choice.

??? you can buy a RS1 for around $4k

If you want to use a lens for a your CIH setup an RS2/HD100 can be had for about $6k. ISCO II can be had for $500-$800. How do you get $13k?

I guess the problem here is that so many are misinformed...

OK, now he's TROLLING!

now he's giving us the sales pitch :D
The dealer told me $4K for the lens and another $4k for the motorized sled it rode on. i'm not sure what an ISCO II is but if it costs $600. it's probably not something you want to watch movies through.

Art did not like the JVC for several reasons.
But it is a good unit by its own for a digital.

$4k for a straightforward anamorphic lens seems like highway robbery to me -- you can buy an uber-complex top-quality Nikon or Canon lens for a fraction of that amount.

But $4k for a freakin' SLED for push it back and forth!? That's insane!!

But $4k for a freakin' SLED for push it back and forth!? That's insane!!

Checked Runco's pricing for their units lately? ;):p

Putting a lens in front of another lens destroys everything. It a joke. It lets you use 25% more of the chip because you electronically stretch the image virtically (a great 13/10 image distorting scale) before you distroy everything with the optical horizontal stretch. Contrast, light transmission, and a complete loss of depth of field making perfect focusing impossible. A curved screen helps but is not a perfect fix. Its marketing only and the blind follow each other in doing it. However, if you want the effect and pays your money, its a free world. I'd rather do a zoom and the cost is right. Zero.

Instead of being a control freak, why dont you just let people say what they saw.

BTW, your still a TROLL!!!!!!

:D

Cliff

Putting a lens in front of another lens destroys everything. It a joke. It lets you use 25% more of the chip because you electronically stretch the image virtically (a great 13/10 image distorting scale) before you distroy everything with the optical horizontal stretch. Contrast, light transmission, and a complete loss of depth of field making perfect focusing impossible. A curved screen helps but is not a perfect fix. Its marketing only and the blind follow each other in doing it. However, if you want the effect and pays your money, its a free world. I'd rather do a zoom and the cost is right. Zero.

Actually, it's perfect for Art's setup. I LOVE it. When that thing kicks into 2:35, yummmmmy.

Cliff

I also took it at Cliffy's back in June... And will be going panny2000 :D

No seriously..

It has its shortcoming no doubt but overall I liked what I saw and there begun the slow process of change. From that experience, I'll be pulling the beloved gamma corrected, fan modded, XG135 off the ceiling in the next few weeks for something else.. Most likely the 2000e as a stop gap measure for a couple years but still kicking around the RS1 option as well... 2000e due to it's overall quieter fan level leading to an overall superior theater experience.. or suffer that for the slightly better pic on the RS1 at the expense of more $$ and more fan noise. :confused::confused:

I also took it at Cliffy's back in June... And will be going panny2000 :D

No seriously..

It has its shortcoming no doubt but overall I liked what I saw and there begun the slow process of change. From that experience, I'll be pulling the beloved gamma corrected, fan modded, XG135 off the ceiling in the next few weeks for something else.. Most likely the 2000e as a stop gap measure for a couple years but still kicking around the RS1 option as well... 2000e due to it's overall quieter fan level leading to an overall superior theater experience.. or suffer that for the slightly better pic on the RS1 at the expense of more $$ and more fan noise. :confused::confused:

Dude, are you smoking crack? Fan noise?

What is that? :cool::eek::cool::eek:

;)

Personally for me after seeing the Panny, I would choose the RS1 in a heart beat.

It is that much better and love the light output. The blacks are the absolute best I have ever seen from any digital EVER.

They aint no G90, but they are very good. :)

Cliffy

I know... I know.... :o :o

Just after living with the XG for so long... then sitting RIGHT next to the panny (like arm brushing close) in my room I could hear my little buffalo NAS drive in a closed closet 8ft away over the damn panny..... that was life changing.

And I can work a receiver upgrade in there as well and still have $$ left... ahhh this whole hobby is the devil :D

I responded and said I would be happy to host an RS1 owner. I was contacted by a fellow who had purchased one, but we were never able to arrange a meet before he had his installed in the ceiling and then was naturally reluctant to take it down.

He recently purchased a G90.

Enjoy.

I responded and said I would be happy to host an RS1 owner. I was contacted by a fellow who had purchased one, but we were never able to arrange a meet before he had his installed in the ceiling and then was naturally reluctant to take it down.

He recently purchased a G90.

Enjoy.

Yep, if I was going to do an 8ft wide screen then the G90 would be the choice. :)

Silverstar of course, with gamma correction.

Cliff

I also took it at Cliffy's back in June... And will be going panny2000 :D

No seriously..

It has its shortcoming no doubt but overall I liked what I saw and there begun the slow process of change. From that experience, I'll be pulling the beloved gamma corrected, fan modded, XG135 off the ceiling in the next few weeks for something else.. Most likely the 2000e as a stop gap measure for a couple years but still kicking around the RS1 option as well... 2000e due to it's overall quieter fan level leading to an overall superior theater experience.. or suffer that for the slightly better pic on the RS1 at the expense of more $$ and more fan noise. :confused::confused:

I have been also debating to retire my XG for 3 chip DLP with CH onto a 10" wide screen. It is shame that I only have about 1000 hrs on the unit.:(

If crt was all that, you should not have the need to buy two of the monsters. :confused: For what? Trying to make it look like a digital thats what. And it still wont be as bright, or clear..
You also need to rent a semi truck and cranes to move and install, hours upon hours of adjusting them, more adjusting when the convergence drifts down the road. For all the costs you pay getting it calibrated, and tune up's, that would cover half the cost of what you could probably get a black pearl for. I know i would not want to pay all that for calibration. Seems like it's absolutley necessary for crt. Give me a few min with a black pearl and boom. :)

You obviously haven't see the famous stack... :)

I agree brightness is not up to some digitals (hence stack for large screens) but convergence..at least it can be done whereas some digital have serious issue with that. I only have done minor reconvergence once a year which takes five minutes. Initial set up other than physical instal have to be done on both technologies.

You obviously haven't see the famous stack... :)


I can only imagine.. It BETTER be better than any digital, but i still can see digital beating it in clarity and brightness with blue ray. I've seen the pearl and i dont like the colors, black pearl i hear is improved but crt is the grail when it comes to color saturation, skin tones, and just overall purity.. I would treasure a g90 let alone two and never get rid of it, digitals are dime a dozen and can always be replaced. My ultimate theater i would have both. But the reality is it's so much cheaper and easier to go digital.

If crt was all that, you should not have the need to buy two of the monsters. :confused: For what? Trying to make it look like a digital thats what. And it still wont be as bright, or clear..
You also need to rent a semi truck and cranes to move and install, hours upon hours of adjusting them, more adjusting when the convergence drifts down the road. For all the costs you pay getting it calibrated, and tune up's, that would cover half the cost of what you could probably get a black pearl for. I know i would not want to pay all that for calibration. Seems like it's absolutley necessary for crt. Give me a few min with a black pearl and boom. :)

You're absolutely right. For someone that hasn't seen one, you're sure opinonated. So keep your pearls and your rubys and your diamonds, because for us it's all about rare earth phosphors baby! :p

I've seen the pearl and i dont like the colors, black pearl i hear is improved but crt is the grail when it comes to color saturation, skin tones, and just overall purity.. .

Oops, I slammed you without reading the second page. You pretty much proved my point. Keep dreaming, keep believing in vaporware that doesn't exist yet.

We here on the dark side will just keep on enjoying what we have for years..

I've seen 4 different RS-1's in various screen sizes, 1 of which was fully calibrated by Michael Chen so no excuses about it not being calibrated.

My opinion remains the same. It's a boring, uninvolving image. The blacks aren't deep, even with a neutral density filter (which helps). So there is no punch to the image. Also, even though it's a 1080p unit, there is still an SDE that causes motion artifacts and betrays the resolving power. I prefer a crt pj at 720p without all of the motion "gunk" and SDE. You can't see the actual grid but it does taint the image. I've seen the RS-1 on some huge setups, 150" wide 2.35 and a 16'x9' 16:9 setup. The huge screen sizes don't compensate for the shortcomings.

:confused:

There's no room for a back seat. heck, there's no room for a trunk. And that may explain why they put the glove compartment where a trunk is usually found.

Where there's a will ... there is a way :D:D

That NEC travelled 700 odd kilometres like that and fired up first time on arrival back home. A memorable trip indeed :)

Cheers all,

Russ

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/benny/Misc/fast9PG_little.jpg

Nice work Russ... who needs airbags? ;) :p

LOL!! The pillows and seatbelt are a nice touch. :D

LOL, i'm guessing the wife didn't know you pillaged her couch to save your projector. Gotta admire the determination though :D

ha

Keep dreaming, keep believing in vaporware that doesn't exist yet


I believe george lucas runs vaporware in his theater, seems to exist in his theater.. I hear he had crt's but dumped them for vapor digital :o

Hehe, cmon' now Tryg. I'm not trying to "control" anything. Go ahead and do a search for my posts in the 3K and up forum to see my "review" of the RS1.

Two drawbacks since my initial review being slow panels and innacurate colors, but other than that, great little unit.

Oh, and by the way, Happy Thanksgiving!

Cliff

Hey Cliffy,

Still causing trouble huh? I think some of the opinions I read come from people with "slow panels".:p When will this CRT vs. Digital end?

It's unfortunate that JVC is STILL using .7" size panels for their new 1080p machines. I recently saw one of JVC's "theatre" projectors that uses a 1.7" panel and produces a resolution of 4096 x 2160. The picture is really beautiful and makes all these .7" units look like toys. They must be transfering those movies at a higher resolution than 1080p. They are delivered to the theatre on a hard drive.

At the rate things seem to be going, the prices will drop almost as fast as the US dollar.:rolleyes:

Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Xmas, Cliffy.

Bruce

Hey Cliffy,

Still causing trouble huh? I think some of the opinions I read come from people with "slow panels".:p When will this CRT vs. Digital end?

It's unfortunate that JVC is STILL using .7" size panels for their new 1080p machines. I recently saw one of JVC's "theatre" projectors that uses a 1.7" panel and produces a resolution of 4096 x 2160. The picture is really beautiful and makes all these .7" units look like toys. They must be transfering those movies at a higher resolution than 1080p. They are delivered to the theatre on a hard drive.

At the rate things seem to be going, the prices will drop almost as fast as the US dollar.:rolleyes:

Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Xmas, Cliffy.

Bruce

And a Happy Holidays to you as well my friend. Glad to see that all is ok with you. :)

I'm assuming your down in the warm climate enjoying the nice weather. ;)

I've found a couple of 4K theaters in the Chicago area. Thinking about going to see a movie at one for a first hand peek.

Noticed today Beowulf in 3D at my local Imax. 3D from beginning to end. Gonna check that out too.

http://www.beowulfmovie.com/

Take care big dog!

Cliffy

And a Happy Holidays to you as well my friend. Glad to see that all is ok with you. :)

I'm assuming your down in the warm climate enjoying the nice weather. ;)

I've found a couple of 4K theaters in the Chicago area. Thinking about going to see a movie at one for a first hand peek.

Noticed today Beowulf in 3D at my local Imax. 3D from beginning to end. Gonna check that out too.

http://www.beowulfmovie.com/

Take care big dog!

Cliffy


Cliffy,

Actually, i'm up in NY now. I'll be going to FL in the beginning of January.

As for Beowulf, the Imax theatres are running (70mm Imax) film (which is like 35mm VistaVision). Most of the theatres that are using the digital projectors that Disney put in and payed for are DLP, from what I've seen.

Hope everything is going well for you.

Bruce

I've seen the RS-1 on some huge setups, 150" wide 2.35 and a 16'x9' 16:9 setup. The huge screen sizes don't compensate for the shortcomings.

I believe I saw the 150" setup you mention and I was very impressed. True, blacks aren't where my gamma corrected Sony 1292 was, but I would have to say it was better in most other regards.

Putting a lens in front of another lens destroys everything. It a joke. It lets you use 25% more of the chip because you electronically stretch the image virtically (a great 13/10 image distorting scale) before you distroy everything with the optical horizontal stretch. Contrast, light transmission, and a complete loss of depth of field making perfect focusing impossible. A curved screen helps but is not a perfect fix. Its marketing only and the blind follow each other in doing it. However, if you want the effect and pays your money, its a free world. I'd rather do a zoom and the cost is right. Zero.

I do not know how bad the electronics degrade the image but putting a color corrected prism in front ot the projector at tje exit pupil does not degrade the image. I use a panamoprh prism pair and it has not degraded the image at all.

If you have the room and I do not overfilling a 2:35 screen may give you the best image but going from 1.78 ifromat to a 2;35 format has more effect on increasing my immersion in hte image than going from DVD to hdvd or blue ray and going from dvd to hidef hdvd or blue ray has a greater effect on the image than going from a 1000 dollar 720P dlp projector to a 50,000 dollar Sim HT5000.

So your 2000 Toshiba xa1 99-200 dollars will contribute more to improving the image than spending 50,000 on the best dlp projector out there and seeing a 2:35 movie on a 2:35 screen will have a greater impact than either.

I believe I saw the 150" setup you mention and I was very impressed. True, blacks aren't where my gamma corrected Sony 1292 was, but I would have to say it was better in most other regards.

150" Screen from an RS1, gawd and I thought Cliffs screen was pushing it thats just nutz and I would not want to see the picture.

So your 2000 Toshiba xa1 99-200 dollars will contribute more to improving the image than spending 50,000 on the best dlp projector out there and seeing a 2:35 movie on a 2:35 screen will have a greater impact than either.

Signal has always been the most important link for me too. The combination of all three must be...well...incredible. Just ask Art.

There is nothing magic that a 2.40 screen will do different than a curved humungus 16:9 screen won't do with 4 way masking.

There is nothing magic that a 2.40 screen will o different than a curved humungus c16:9 screen won't do with 4 way masking.

There is nothing a 16:9 humongous screen with 4 way masking can do that a 2.40 screen set up with a CIH two way masking system won't do a lot easier.

There is nothing a 16:9 humongous screen with 4 way masking can do that a 2.40 screen set up with a CIH two way masking system won't do a lot easier.
Will a 2.40 CIH 2-way masking screen more easily allow increased height at full-raster width for 16:9 content? ;)

I have both and RS-1 and a 9500LC Ultra. I have to tell you...I love the RS-1. The CRT without a doubt kills the RS-1 with black level...but the brightness, sharpness and punch to the RS-1 is fantastic.

So if you could get a CRT with a brighter image that maintained sharpness then you would have your ultimate dream projection system ???

TRUE 1080p from a digital projector ???

I have a question about this.

Most digitals are pixel based machines.

So a 1920x1080 digital is EXACTLY that right so far ?

Lets say you send 1920x1080 to a 1920x1080 PJ.

As part of the setup you "KEYSTONE" the picture.

Did you just loose the ability to show full 1920x1080 due to keystone ?

Does it just mask the picture?
Or does is compress the image?

Either way I dont see how its still 1920x1080.


So are these 1920x1080 digital really showing that ?

most of the high end units dont have "keystone" they must be mounted level.. then they use optical lens shifting to move the image around. Therefore allowing full use of the panel. Otherwise, yes they would be losing some pixels by digitally keystoning the image like I've seen in a lot of conference rooms.

Yes, if you use keystone on a digital unit you have just corrupted the image. You've stretched/squeezed it to make a trapezoidal shape on the rectangular panel. You no longer have anything like 1920x1080.

But as zman says, you don't generally do that. Any decent digital has lens offset that lets you do those corrections optically, without loss of resolution.

TRUE 1080p from a digital projector ???

I have a question about this.

Most digitals are pixel based machines.

So a 1920x1080 digital is EXACTLY that right so far ?

Lets say you send 1920x1080 to a 1920x1080 PJ.

As part of the setup you "KEYSTONE" the picture.

Did you just loose the ability to show full 1920x1080 due to keystone ?

Does it just mask the picture?
Or does is compress the image?

Either way I dont see how its still 1920x1080.


So are these 1920x1080 digital really showing that ?


You're right. And I say that based on a huge 3 CHIP DLP that I was recently trained on. It has a bunch of adjustments in the menu, to include geometry adjustment. And because there's so many things that can distort the image, there's also adjustments for pixel phase and another pixel something-or-the-other that also helps to correct on the issues that arise when you do anything but shoot the image on a perfect screen on with a perfect signal, on a perfect day... and since there's no such thing, you could spend twice as much time setting it up than you would any CRT projector. And forget about maintaining that perfect resolution. It ain't gonna happen. You could spend a good part of the day going back over your setup to smooth out the flaws that happens when making other adjustments.

The very high end 3 chip digitals have a ton of things in the many menus. And my first thought was why?... well, after spending a day with several of them. The answer is an easy one. They still have a long long ways to go. however, I was told that the next model would have less things in the menu, to Include having better controls and options...hey, at the price these things cost. Why would there need to be a next model, especially one that corrects on the already known problems that were present on the present ones.......hmm. I guess that's just the nature of digital display technology..

Obviously you can't go out of the confines of the chip. So if you are projecting a trapezoidal shape and you want to correct to the rectangular shap of the chip on a chip machine, you have to use a smaller portion of the chip leading to a loss of some resolution. Be more concerned about how the internal scaler screws up the image to do this rather than some small loss of resolution The right way is to mechanically set the lens in the proper relationship to the screen.

Keystone can and should be avoided. No problem there if you have the right lens offset that fits your screen's drop down.
But some of the newer 3-panel comes with misconvergence correction in digital domain processing.

It appears that this feature indeed will rescale the image. It will not be 1:1 pixel mapping.

150" Screen from an RS1, gawd and I thought Cliffs screen was pushing it thats just nutz and I would not want to see the picture.

Huh?

Why would you not want to see the picture?

Do you think it wouldn't be bright enough? I was more than bright enough, and in econo mode nonetheless...

The RS1 is rated at only 700 ANSI lumens, only about 2.5x more than a typical 8" CRT. (However the CRT will throw out a LOT more than its rated ANSI lumens on most program material.)

150" wide is a huge screen for that amount of light. It would be 87 sq ft for a 16:9 screen -- I know it was 2.35:1 but the brightness would be the same as the equivalent 16:9 unless they used an anamorphic lens in which case it's about 30% brighter. 700 lumens over 87 sq ft works out to about 8 ftL. Not optimal, but certainly watchable. If you use an anamorph to use the entire panel, you should get something closer to 10.5 ftL. That's perfectly reasonable, and brighter than a lot of CRTers get on their smaller screens. So brightness shouldn't be a problem.

On the other hand Don *has* an RS1, so if he thinks it would look awful on that screen...

most of the high end units dont have "keystone" they must be mounted level.. then they use optical lens shifting to move the image around. Therefore allowing full use of the panel. Otherwise, yes they would be losing some pixels by digitally keystoning the image like I've seen in a lot of conference rooms.


Lets maybe try and keep this with ref to the RS1 .

I read the following

" helpful features like an x2 optical zoom, horizontal/vertical image shift and keystone correction all make the HD1 pretty easy to adapt to a wide variety of room shapes and sizes"

http://www.trustedreviews.com/tvs/review/2007/07/21/JVC-DLA-HD1-1080p-LCD-Projector/p2

This mentions keystone.

Ive only see a few HD1 (RS1) units and not spent time playing with one, so is keystone an option ?

Does the use of the lens shift have an auto keystone system as part of the system ?

No, lens shift is purely optical. Think of the old-style bellows cameras that let you offset the lens from the film in order to distort the resulting image in a desired way. That's basically what you're doing with a digital pj's lens shift. See e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_correction and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_correction_lens .

With this kind of perspective correction, you can effectively project the rectangular image panel onto a rectangular screen area without any need for keystone.

Lets maybe try and keep this with ref to the RS1

Ive only see a few HD1 (RS1) units and not spent time playing with one, so is keystone an option ?

Does the use of the lens shift have an auto keystone system as part of the system ?

http://www.projectorcentral.com/JVC-DLA-RS1U.htm

Digital Keystone: No
Lens Shift: H&V

user manual:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/pdf/projector_manual_3588.pdf

Gary - Thank you.

Clarence - As always your ability for research is second to none. And of course thank you.


For the monkeys at "Trusted reviews" I wonder what they actually got sent to test !!! as "THEY" found keystone !!!





Is there any down side to the "lens shift" way of life ?

The RS1 is rated at only 700 ANSI lumens, only about 2.5x more than a typical 8" CRT. (However the CRT will throw out a LOT more than its rated ANSI lumens on most program material.)

150" wide is a huge screen for that amount of light. It would be 87 sq ft for a 16:9 screen -- I know it was 2.35:1 but the brightness would be the same as the equivalent 16:9 unless they used an anamorphic lens in which case it's about 30% brighter. 700 lumens over 87 sq ft works out to about 8 ftL. Not optimal, but certainly watchable. If you use an anamorph to use the entire panel, you should get something closer to 10.5 ftL. That's perfectly reasonable, and brighter than a lot of CRTers get on their smaller screens. So brightness shouldn't be a problem.

On the other hand Don *has* an RS1, so if he thinks it would look awful on that screen...

I guess it didn't come up, but the screen was a Da-lite High Power which may explain things. The RS1 was in a fairly optimal position - a foot or two behind and a foot or two above the viewing position. I'd imagine getting close to the 2.8 gain. The projector was in economy mode with over 600 hours on the bulb (thats 3 years of HT use for me!). Under these conditions the picture was more than bright enough for me.

Ah. Yes, a HP screen with the projector near the viewing position would make a **HUGE** difference.

The RS1 is rated at only 700 ANSI lumens, only about 2.5x more than a typical 8" CRT. (However the CRT will throw out a LOT more than its rated ANSI lumens on most program material.)

150" wide is a huge screen for that amount of light. It would be 87 sq ft for a 16:9 screen -- I know it was 2.35:1 but the brightness would be the same as the equivalent 16:9 unless they used an anamorphic lens in which case it's about 30% brighter. 700 lumens over 87 sq ft works out to about 8 ftL. Not optimal, but certainly watchable. If you use an anamorph to use the entire panel, you should get something closer to 10.5 ftL. That's perfectly reasonable, and brighter than a lot of CRTers get on their smaller screens. So brightness shouldn't be a problem.

On the other hand Don *has* an RS1, so if he thinks it would look awful on that screen...

See if this link helps. It appears the RS1 is more than up to task in the brightness department. How about a 200" screen?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11070269#post11070269

There's also a link in the post that shows how.

Big and bright doesn't make up for poor blacks, SDE and ho-hum color accuracy.

Nexxxtttttt!

Big and bright doesn't make up for poor blacks, SDE and ho-hum color accuracy.

Nexxxtttttt!

True, fade to blacks won't hold for more than a second or two before your eyes adjust. And it will be noticed on mostly black scenes.

But then again, unless you have a LC projector with gamma correction either you have the same or you are crushing blacks.

I would be surprised if you could see SDE outside of one screen width. I have pretty sharp vision and SDE was a non issue for me about 8 or 10 feet from the screen in question. I am very sensitive to SDE.

For me, as long as flesh tones are realistic I don't put colour accuracy near the top of my list.


Black level is really the only caveat compared to LC gamma corrected CRT (non LC need not apply!!!), and the things it does well are more than enough to compensate for that.

Of course, I still wish it was bright enough to do 15' wide on a unity gain screen....

For me, as long as flesh tones are realistic I don't put colour accuracy near the top of my list.


I'm puzzled here.. how can you get good flesh tones with inaccurate colors?

My belief has been that true flesh tones are an attribute of accurate colors.

MP. It depends on the color of the flesh tones. If the color decoding is off, you will have something that noticeably looks wrong. THE DREADED POOR FLESH TONES. too red. Too green. But minor color errors in flesh tones would be in the range of differences in one race's flesh tones not to mention makeup and the lighting used to take the picture. How dark is her sun tan? How about the makeup used in a porn flick to say eliminate bikini panty lines.

MP. It depends on the color of the flesh tones. If the color decoding is off, you will have something that noticeably looks wrong. THE DREADED POOR FLESH TONES. too red. Too green. But minor color errors in flesh tones would be in the range of differences in one race's flesh tones not to mention makeup and the lighting used to take the picture. How dark is her sun tan? How about the makeup used in a porn flick to say eliminate bikini panty lines.

nope, that won't work with me. If your color pallet is limited, so will the flesh tones be.

Color accuracy is very important to flesh tones, and a device that would have good color accuracy would stand a better chance at properly defining any skin or race. When it's not done properly, it will either over exaggerate and add green or provide one flat tone (usually pink), when all know that no one has green in their complexion.

Wrong. Don't you remember the color of Cliffy when he drinks too much! Green baby.

Just because it occurs in nature (is Cliffy natural?? :D) doesn't mean you want your display to look like that!! I agree with Mike -- you have to have correct grayscale AND correct primaries/secondaries to render colors properly. That's why CRTs need color filtering. With e.g. an 8500 you can tune it to perfect grayscale, but the skintones &etc aren't right because the primaries aren't right. Put in some HD145's and you move the primaries to just about where they should be, and suddenly the skintones look a whole lot better.

Where the color being off will get you, is when you recognize something and it does not look right.

I bet women would be better at seeing something is wrong with the color. They are always commenting on how other women are dressed. Us guys are just undressing them with our eyes:) The reason why we want our skin tones to look right.

Deron.

Hey. I have filtered red and green tubes and a Ken W. calibration evry year or so. But my point is you can have some delta errors (every CRT will have them wth only two adjustment points) unless you use say a Lumagen which offers up to 21 point gray scale adjustment. You can certainly enjoy a set not perfectly calibrated but you will indeed like it better properely calibrated with 21 point calibration. What, you are not doing this? Shame on you. :)

I'm puzzled here.. how can you get good flesh tones with inaccurate colors?

My belief has been that true flesh tones are an attribute of accurate colors.

What I mean is that I don't care so much that the flesh tone is 100% true to the transfer. As long as I can look at a person's face and it looks natural, that's good enough for me.

I guess I am not a videophile, but maybe a cinemaphile. The job of my projector is to immerse me in the movie - make me forget about the projector. If reds are a bit orange, chances are I don't know what the exact shade is supposed to be, since I wasn't there during the filming. Therefore if it's not spot on I don't care.

This was why I went CRT. No matter what, I know what black is supposed to be. I can't trick my mind into believing a gray haze is pitch black. This will be my sacrifice when I go digital (as soon as my room remodel is done). Luckily they have got much better in this regard.

Anyways... I am no calibrator, but it seems you can still have good flesh tones while being off in other colours. With the RS1 I have heard someone mention grass looking a it neon in a scene of Seabiscuit. This is another example of where non-true colours could be bad.

But there is no perfect projector, so you have to balance your compromises. I had a 110" wide torus with my 1292, and that was pretty much pushing the limit. Now I want to go bigger - 12' to 15' wide, so CRT is out...

hello: Mark, I agree

Wrong. Don't you remember the color of Cliffy when he drinks too much! Green baby.


:p:D:p:D:p


So it's come down to this.