TruVue Vango - Owner's Thread - Page 13 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 06:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
Dan. As you probaby know I have a Studeotec 130 110'D 1.78 aspect ratio GII screen. It is measuring only about 1.1 gain at screen center. For years and years I used a Ehome 9500LC ultra highly modified by Mike Parker. I sent my red tube with a red C element to a company in Atlanta to have the element installed to improve the colorimetery at a substantial hit in lumens. I ended up getting about 7 ft lamberts. In my black pit I had more than enough lumens and all guests were quite happy with the picture.

I switched to digital and higher lumens at the cost of fantastic blacks because of the difficulty and cost of repairs not to mention that my business included and continues to to incude the sale and installation of digital projectors. I am quite happy putting up about 15 ft lambertds from a wide variety of digital projectors. I am a stickler for sharpness and I prefer DLPs with really good lenses like the Vango and the Joe Kane Samsung SP-A900B all fed by a Lumagen. Opinions re what is sufficient brightnesswill greatly differ but most people with lamp based projectors are lucky if the get about 10 ft lamberts and suffer not. Ones eyes are very adaptable. I find 20 ft lamberts to be uncomfortably bright. Brightnbess is like loud speaker volume. On quick A/Bs people will prefer the speaker playing loudest. As you know, there is a lot more to quality music reproduction than loudness. Ditto for video quality. Lamps dim. About 35% after a short time. An LED doesn't really dim at all. A 1000 lumen projector after a short times becomes a 600 lumens LED machine.

I would not think a 12 or 14 ft wide screen would be a good match for any current LED 600 lumens or 1000 lumens bulb machine. A nine or 10 ft screen of 1.3 gain or so should provide good illumination if not at the 12 or 14 ft lambert standard. But dropping down to 10 ft lamberts from 14 is nothing like a 30% decreasebto ones eyes. Because of the quadruple the lumens to doubling the brightness to ones eyes, the drop in brightness to ones eyes is perhaps 10% in brightness. No big deal.

Most can't simply afford a Titan. A great machine for a large screen. For me, eve if I could afford it at dealer demo cost it would be way to bright for my 8 ft wide screen.

Am I happy with what I have? You bet. And that is all that counts. Was I happy with the PQ from my CRT? You bet. 7 ft lamberts was plenty.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 08:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DanFrancis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Aurora, IL, USA
Posts: 1,858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Mark, I can appreciate your experiences, and I was quite jealous of your MP modded Marqee- but in this particular situation (LED on microperfed 133" ST130 screen- in that room) I'm right. The 3-chip can do what the LED cannot, without question. And I'm not talking about a Titan either- that would be no contest.

I agree with the promotion of the LED technology, in whatever platform: Delta or Chi-Lin....But they just cannot drive large screens as well as other technology can. Why is it so difficult to concede that? I get it, you guys are trying to sell the Vango- you have the market cornered on that piece, and you are selling the hell out of them- but it isn't all things to all people.

I also agree that light output is not the only metric to image quality, but it is important- if it were not, why would Joel have been espousing 9" CRTs with 6' wide screens for all those years- hell that's what he used in his trainings. Smaller screen= more punch from CRT, and now smaller screen = more punch from LED and it's fantastic! But talk about 10 foot wide or larger screens, and you'd better talk about 3-chip machines.

Dan

Dan Francis
Head of Sales US
C'SEED Entertainment Systems GMBH
www.cseed.tv
df@cseed.tv
DanFrancis is offline  
post #363 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 09:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
I currently have a RS20 and am contemplating the possibility of replacing it with a Vango. I have been sitting ~ 12 ft from a 110x62 (126 diag 16x9) 2.8 HP screen, with the pj optimally located. This is a (viewing distance)/(screen width) ratio of ~ 1.3, and even with only 400 lumens this would generate ~ 24 ftL, too bright for Mark but nice for us 'big plasma' worshippers.

HOWEVER, I have recently gotten the itch to go for an even larger screen; I could manage a 128x72 (147 diag 16x9), and 400 lumens on a 2.4 HP screen like this would generate only ~15 ftL, enough for Mark but I'm not sure. I can get the viewing angle corresponding to this larger screen (distance/width ratio of ~ 1.07) by moving my viewing distance from 12 ft to a bit under 10 ft. I've done this, and damit I DO LIKE THIS BIGGER pic! So now I'm going to need more lumens (or just continue to sit ~ 10 ft away!).
millerwill is online now  
post #364 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 10:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
Bill. You should figure closer to 500 lumens, not 400.

I am not suggesting that 600 lumens is ideal for a screen of 10 ft width or larger with a gain of say 1.3. Go to a high power, set up near your eye level and for those that sit on the center line or near it, the light should be plenty.

For a large, normal gain screen, I agree a good three chipper would be better. And I am really not suggestimg a good three chiper to be one with small DLP chips (,7 or whatever). I mean three .95 DLPs of DC4 vintage and a good lens. The .7 3 chippers do have nice lenses.

The issue is money. Even $10K is too high for many. For those that can afford it and have a good size but not hugh screen or a large screen made of HP, the Vango is a real bargain. I would rather have a Lumis or some other high quality 3 chipper. But its too rich for my blood.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #365 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 10:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DanFrancis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Aurora, IL, USA
Posts: 1,858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The issue isn't money: The Vango is an absolute bargain for what it is! It competes well with any of the Sonys, JVCs,lower level Sims, Runcos, and DPs- and none of those should be paired with a screen that's larger than 120" diagonal.

It's practically an epidemic on these forums to see people pair projectors with screens that are WAY too large for the projector/room/rest of the system- especially when the screen insn't AT. Somewhere along the way, the screen sizes started to grow (because we all want a bigger image) probably about the time that the average price of a consumer-level projector slid from 12-13k down to 7-9k, and actually increased in "performance" with contrast numbers shooting through the roof and lumens ratings remaining high. Then we throw these "equations" into the mix when people are discussing upgrade paths for projection systems (pj+screen) and it's a perpetual spread of misinformation. There's a fundamental misunderstanding of what a higher-gain screen can, and cannot do for you- how it affects your viewing area, and how the viewing environment plays into that as well.

I'm not blaming those "in the industry" for this- I can tell that the dealers, calibrators, and installers on these forums are essentially spreading good info- but we inevitably end up with a "telephone game" where the information gets slightly misquoted each time someone else interprets it- then passes THAT interpretation along.

Honestly, I kind of miss the CRT days: small screen=7" guns, medium screen=8" guns, big screen=9"guns and how hard you drove the projector was evident with a peek into the lenses. With a digital, it's point-aim-shoot; there's a picture as big as I want it, whether it's optimal or not- and there's nobody here to tell me otherwise, or to show me what to look for.

And in this era of internet-based sales, how could we expect anything less? At least AVS bucks the trend and actually offers traveling services (at least some installs have been done out of state, I know)...but other web-based sales companies do not have these services available for the consumer...who then comes here, and we lather, rinse, repeat.

In any case, I'm getting off-topic.

Back to your normally scheduled programming..

Dan

Dan Francis
Head of Sales US
C'SEED Entertainment Systems GMBH
www.cseed.tv
df@cseed.tv
DanFrancis is offline  
post #366 of 858 Old 04-21-2011, 11:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanFrancis View Post

The issue isn't money: The Vango is an absolute bargain for what it is! It competes well with any of the Sonys, JVCs,lower level Sims, Runcos, and DPs- and none of those should be paired with a screen that's larger than 120" diagonal.

It's practically an epidemic on these forums to see people pair projectors with screens that are WAY too large for the projector/room/rest of the system- especially when the screen insn't AT. Somewhere along the way, the screen sizes started to grow (because we all want a bigger image) probably about the time that the average price of a consumer-level projector slid from 12-13k down to 7-9k, and actually increased in "performance" with contrast numbers shooting through the roof and lumens ratings remaining high. Then we throw these "equations" into the mix when people are discussing upgrade paths for projection systems (pj+screen) and it's a perpetual spread of misinformation. There's a fundamental misunderstanding of what a higher-gain screen can, and cannot do for you- how it affects your viewing area, and how the viewing environment plays into that as well.

I'm not blaming those "in the industry" for this- I can tell that the dealers, calibrators, and installers on these forums are essentially spreading good info- but we inevitably end up with a "telephone game" where the information gets slightly misquoted each time someone else interprets it- then passes THAT interpretation along.

Honestly, I kind of miss the CRT days: small screen=7" guns, medium screen=8" guns, big screen=9"guns and how hard you drove the projector was evident with a peek into the lenses. With a digital, it's point-aim-shoot; there's a picture as big as I want it, whether it's optimal or not- and there's nobody here to tell me otherwise, or to show me what to look for.

And in this era of internet-based sales, how could we expect anything less? At least AVS bucks the trend and actually offers traveling services (at least some installs have been done out of state, I know)...but other web-based sales companies do not have these services available for the consumer...who then comes here, and we lather, rinse, repeat.

In any case, I'm getting off-topic.

Back to your normally scheduled programming..

Dan

I'm not sure just what your issue is. I think most people here are pretty familiar with the limitations of a high gain screen (pj location, viewer location, etc.), but for a 2 person HT in a modest size room (mine is only 14x17) it is quite feasible and produces excellent results. And it's quite feasible to have a very large and dynamic pic. E.g., even though my RS20 is down below 300 lumens (with ~ 1300 hrs on the lamp), I get ~ 15 ftL off my 110x62 HP screen; and sitting ~10 ft from it gives a ~50 deg viewing angle, and a highly engrossing pic.
millerwill is online now  
post #367 of 858 Old 04-22-2011, 10:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
David Shapiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park,Illinois,U.S.A
Posts: 515
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 12
So, Dan and Brian, the DPI rep, graciously came to my house to show me the DPI LED and 3-chip Highlite, side by side. There were some technical issues with the sound, as my new Anthem processor wasn't playing nicely with the other children, probably due to HDMI handshake issues with constant swapping out cables to the different projectors. They were even kind and confident enough to allow a rep from Sim2 to be there during their presentation ( long story, not worth going into).
In my pretty well light-controlled room, albeit with white ceilings and light-colored contrast-robbing material behind the screen, several things came out.
I have a 120" wide, 133" diag microperf Stewart StudioTek 130. We played a combination of Blu-rays and HiDef sports on Comcast, my usual sources. In that environment, both the LED and 3-chip had certain strengths. However, from an image standpoint, the 3-chip was the clear winner. The image was bright, punchy and had excellent blacks. The LED had a sharper image, with somewhat better detail, but the blacks were just so-so. The 3 chip was the clear winner. There are other options: a higher gain screen, with it's own set of weaknesses: waiting for brighter LED machines to come down the road, or possibly stacking 2 LED units, although that might be very difficult to accomplish. So, in my theater, for my situation, the 3-chip wins.
I simply don't know how to figure in lamp-dimming as an issue. Do the lamps dim in a progressive manner, do they level off, when do you change them out? We use our theater a lot, both for movies, TV and sports. So, there are a lot of lamp strikes.
Fun stuff, huh?

David

DES
David Shapiro is offline  
post #368 of 858 Old 04-30-2011, 09:56 PM
Member
 
Spirit84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I come to you - the Vango experts pleading for some direction please!!!
I am really new to this hobby and I am really interested in a Vango preojector and anamorphic lens (probably the new Prismasonic 6000 with motorized lift). The problem is I desparately do not want to make a mistake in my upcoming home theatre room. I have never done this before. I would be very much indebted to any of you kind experts if you could help me based on the following:
Here is what I know at this point:
Screen aspect: 2.35 -1
Screen that I want: Seymour A/T, 1.2 gain
Screen size: Either: 100W (108.7D) or 110W (119.5)
Ceiling situation: My ceiling is 7 feet high but I have an I-beam obstruction which measures 9 inches from the top so I have 75 inches from top to floor.
Seating: One row only - just a couch. I would like to have the feeling of sitting in the middle of a movie theatre.
Distance from screen to back of room is 16 feet.
Lighting: Can be completely dark - there are no windows.
Based on these specs:
1: Can I use the Vango/lens in this scenario
2: If so - where should I position the couch?
3: How far back should I mount the projector - I don't want it on top of my head if possible.
4: Curious - is there any issue with the projector beam hitting my head while I watch - I just want to make sure I cover all the bases.
thank you in advance for any help!!
Spirit84 is offline  
post #369 of 858 Old 04-30-2011, 10:19 PM
Member
 
danhawk911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I keep seeing everyone say size limits on here what is the maximum size screen one can use for an led based unit?
danhawk911 is offline  
post #370 of 858 Old 04-30-2011, 10:24 PM
Member
 
danhawk911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I keep seeing everyone say size limits on here what is the maximum size screen one can use for an led based unit? Also to throw on 16x9 would I need any thing else other then what comes in the box or should I use the cinema scope and use the ee unit to changed everything into a cinema scope?

One last question about external prosseors how well do they handle content verses a Denon 3808 with laser disk. Mine keeps cutting in it out every-time I run a basic video feed from the laser disk to the Denon with the hdmi to my tv. The Denon keeps dropping the video signal so i have to hook the laser disk player directly to the TV.
danhawk911 is offline  
post #371 of 858 Old 05-01-2011, 02:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
Spirit84. When you are figuring set ups, throws etc, you need to work with the dimensions of the 1.78 height screen that fits within the 2.35 actual screen. In this case, rounding off you have a 1.78 screen that is either 42.5 x 75.6 or 46.7 x 83.1. Its very late and I need to check my numbers tomorrow. But I think you would want to go if possible with the bigger screen. The smaller one is tiny especially for using with an anamorphic.

Now for throw distances. These are figured using the 1.78 width. Using an anamorphic lens, one wants to be close to long throw. Let's assume you will use the shorter throw lens (1.51 to 2.1). Let's put the lens at say 2.0, using the larger screen, the throw distance would be would be about 13.8 ft. The projector is about 20 inches deep and you probably want to leave about 12 inches behind the projector, obviously you have about that and you could move the projector a few inches closer to the screen as needed. Lets look at brightness, filling the full screen using the anamorphic. Your screen area rounding up is about 36 sq ft. Saying at that throw, you get about 450 lumens, longer throws eat up some light, you will get at least 15 ft lamberts with your screen, probably more. You will have plenty of light.

Using a seating distance to your eyes of 1.5 times the 1.78 width, you would sit at about 10.5 ft from the screen. Obviously you could move back a little as needed and in any event your head should not interfere with the projector light beam. All is looking good but its 4AM and I am going to check out and catch a few zzzzzzs. I will double check my numbers tomorrow. II think some might consider me a Vango expert using one myself in my own HT and working very closely with EE as a consultant. Please give me a call and we can go over all the numbers and your set up.

Dan. I will work on your questions tomorrow. You might want to call me so we can clarify what you are asking rather than me posting a bunch of questions back at you. Screen size max depends on screen gain, room conditions, throw distance etc. The EE color box is not a full video processor. It is a CMS, a gamma setter, etc. It does not have aspect modes. The Vago itself will do the vertical stretch needed for use with an anamorphic lens.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #372 of 858 Old 05-04-2011, 10:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
As I noted in the Mits 9000 thread, I had the great pleasure of visiting Mark Halflich at his home Tues afternoon until Wed morning (and enjoying his wonderful ‘Southern Hospitality’, of which he did a fantastic job, esp for a transplanted Yankee!) And Tues night Tom Huffman joined Mark, his wife, and me for dinner, and then an informative projector session (while I also pumped Tom for all the tips I could think of about using ChromaPure).

As also noted in the Mits thread, I was very impressed with this pj—esp its sharpness (with no added ‘Sharpness’ or ‘Detail Enhancement’, etc., and thus no artifacts that I could notice), and its motion handling—both of which I think are noticeably (even to me) better than those of my RS20. E.g, with pro tennis, my RS20 shows the ball on a 140 mph serve with quite a blur, i.e. the ‘ball’ is a streak of length that I would estimate to be ~ 20% of its flight path on the screen, while with the Mits one could almost follow the ball as a ‘ball’ for its entire path. It was also quite bright, ~800 lumens calibrated to D65, about the same as my RS20 with a new lamp (and also the new JVC’s in 2d with a new lamp). This produced ~25 ftL off Mark’s screen, and was too bright for Tom’s preference, though I thought it was great! And the o/f CR of the Mits is very good, if not quite as good as the JVC’s.

However my primary mission in visiting Mark was to see the Vango in operation, which from all I’ve read here I have been considering as a possible replacement for my 2 yr old RS20 (even with its significant step up in $). I saw the Vango at the last CEDIA, but there was significant external light there and it thus didn’t look so impressive. Mark’s HT is a superb environment, so I was surprised and disappointed that I wasn’t more positively impressed. Now all of my disappointment may be attributed to the fact that it is only ~ half as bright as the Mits, and I do like a bright pic (e.g., the giant Kuro, ~25 ftL or so, rather than 15). Weird as it may sound, the Mits struck me as sharper, yet smoother. The Vango seemed to have to have a grainy noise (is this mosquito noise?) that is apparent if one sits really close (1.1 to 1.2 screen widths) as I like to, while the Mits was perfectly smooth (as is typical of lcos). Finally, Mark and I both measured the o/f CR of the Vango to be ~ 2000(+/-500):1 (+/- because of the difficulty of an accurate 0% IRE reading); Tom H confirmed this with his much more accurate instruments and techniques. And to me, this made a CONSIDERABLE difference in its rather poor ability in showing structure in dark scenes [the BD of ‘Last of the Mohicans’ was used as the test for this]. The elevated black level of the Vango viz a viz the Mits was readily apparent on this material. If this is really representative of the Vango, I couldn’t be satisfied replacing my RS20 with it. (And I didn’t see any ‘dlp pop’; is this just due to brightness? Mark’s Vango was producing ~ 13 to 15 ftL off his screen.)

All of which leaves me almost as confused as ever: for there are number of posts, here and elsewhere, of persons who have gone from JVCs or other lcos machines and find the Vango (or Sim2Mico) to be much preferred. My above comments are strictly my own observations, and as I think most of you here know, I am only an ‘enthusiastic amateur’, and there are a number of persons on the Forum much more professional and knowledgeable on these matters than I.

So I had basically come to the conclusion that maybe I’m just not a ‘dlp guy’, as Chris Dallas has described himself (i.e., he finds lcos more to his liking than dlp’s of any price level). BUT, to confuse matters even further, we turned on Mark’s Samsung 900, and it was BEAUFIFUL, showing the rich structure in the dark scenes as well as, or maybe even better than the Mits. So maybe it isn’t dlp itself. Maybe the Vango wasn’t shown in its best calibration mode, or something else . . . ?

PS I note that the level of fan noise of both the Vango and the Mits would be no problem at all for me, and I have my pj within a few feet of my head.
millerwill is online now  
post #373 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 06:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Millerwill, your impressions are interesting.

With the Vango measuring only around 2k:1, I would guess that Mark has disabled the adaptive contrast features on the Vango. I am sure that he has good reasons for doing this but I suspect that you might have been more impressed had you seen the LED dimming at work because this would surely have improved dark scene performance. Maybe Mark can chime in here.

I remember Mark saying that he also disabled the dynamic iris on his Samsung so it presumably should have a similar CR to the Vango. Again, I am sure that Mark has his reasons for doing this.

So, I think you are reacting to the difference in brightness more than anything else.

Also, I wonder if the "grainy noise" that you were seeing on the Vango is not DLP dithering. Did you see it mostly in darker scenes? Single chip DLPs had traditionally had issues with displaying near black. For a full black, the mirror is simply "off" but with levels that are close to black, the mirrors rapidly turn on and off and (presumably with an LED) the mirrors receive pulses of different colors. This creates what is called dithering noise because the brain recognizes that these pulses are not a solid color. This is a simple explanation and probably incorrect in some ways but it may explain what you saw. The Samsung may be better than the Vango in this regard but I would have thought otherwise because the LEDs should be much faster than any color wheel could be.

Like you, I still have my RS20. I sampled the RS50 but it has too many issues for me. So, like you, I am waiting for the next big thing. I am not a 3D guy so I can't overlook the steps backward in 2D that many projectors have taken. Overall, I remain satisfied with my RS20's picture quality. I would love an RS20 with a solid state, no-dimming, 700+ lumen light source.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #374 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 08:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rovingtravler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Clovis, NM
Posts: 1,262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Millerwill,

I agree with everything you had to say about the Vango / mico line except the noise.

I did not see much noise when I saw the Mico 40 and 50, but I agree with the rest.

David

"You buy a Ferrari when you want to be somebody. You buy a Lamborghini when you are somebody." - Frank Sinatra
rovingtravler is offline  
post #375 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 08:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

Millerwill, your impressions are interesting.

With the Vango measuring only around 2k:1, I would guess that Mark has disabled the adaptive contrast features on the Vango. I am sure that he has good reasons for doing this but I suspect that you might have been more impressed had you seen the LED dimming at work because this would surely have improved dark scene performance. Maybe Mark can chime in here.

I remember Mark saying that he also disabled the dynamic iris on his Samsung so it presumably should have a similar CR to the Vango. Again, I am sure that Mark has his reasons for doing this.

So, I think you are reacting to the difference in brightness more than anything else.

Also, I wonder if the "grainy noise" that you were seeing on the Vango is not DLP dithering. Did you see it mostly in darker scenes? Single chip DLPs had traditionally had issues with displaying near black. For a full black, the mirror is simply "off" but with levels that are close to black, the mirrors rapidly turn on and off and (presumably with an LED) the mirrors receive pulses of different colors. This creates what is called dithering noise because the brain recognizes that these pulses are not a solid color. This is a simple explanation and probably incorrect in some ways but it may explain what you saw. The Samsung may be better than the Vango in this regard but I would have thought otherwise because the LEDs should be much faster than any color wheel could be.

Like you, I still have my RS20. I sampled the RS50 but it has too many issues for me. So, like you, I am waiting for the next big thing. I am not a 3D guy so I can't overlook the steps backward in 2D that many projectors have taken. Overall, I remain satisfied with my RS20's picture quality. I would love an RS20 with a solid state, no-dimming, 700+ lumen light source.

I will also be staying with my RS20 until the new offerings at CEDIA. The only thing I would really like to improve in it are sharpness and better handling of fast motion (REALLY liked the Mits9000 in these regards). After having watched 'Last of the Mohicans' so much on Mark's pj's, when I got home last night I put it into my RS20, and I think it looked better than any of them (except for the ueber sharpness of the Mits) in richness and accuracy of the colors, resolution and highlights in the dark scenes, etc.

So I do hope JVC gets all the glitches out for their next offering (and i also like its short throw ratio, since I am getting addicted to watching from very close, 1.07 screen widths = 50 deg viewing angle). Thinking about getting a larger HP screen (128x72)!
millerwill is online now  
post #376 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 08:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TomHuffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 6,479
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 249
This must be a response to the brightness of the Samsung, which is considerable. Its native contrast is not much better than the Vango, about 3000:1.

It was really nice meeting you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

BUT, to confuse matters even further, we turned on Mark's Samsung 900, and it was BEAUFIFUL, showing the rich structure in the dark scenes as well as, or maybe even better than the Mits.


Tom Huffman
ChromaPure Software/AccuPel Video Signal Generators
ISF/THX Calibrations
Springfield, MO

TomHuffman is offline  
post #377 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 09:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

This must be a response to the brightness of the Samsung, which is considerable. Its native contrast is not much better than the Vango, about 3000:1.

It was really nice meeting you.

Sounds right, Tom. There have been a number of comments, though, about the lumens of led pj's been 'more effective', or something, than an equivalent # of lumens from lamps. Is there anything to this? I don't think I'm convinced.
millerwill is online now  
post #378 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 12:10 PM
Member
 
Spirit84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
.....but, is there anybody within a 3 hour driving radius to Toronto that has a Vango (or a Sim2 Mico50) with an anamorphic lens that would be willing to have me over to see how it actually looks?
Spirit84 is offline  
post #379 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 12:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TomHuffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 6,479
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Sounds right, Tom. There have been a number of comments, though, about the lumens of led pj's been 'more effective', or something, than an equivalent # of lumens from lamps. Is there anything to this? I don't think I'm convinced.

A lumen is a lumen.

The only difference with LED illumination is that--absent the color wheel--the color separation artifacts should be much reduced and the light output will remain relatively stable for a very long time, unlike UHP bulbs that start losing brightness almost immediately.

Tom Huffman
ChromaPure Software/AccuPel Video Signal Generators
ISF/THX Calibrations
Springfield, MO

TomHuffman is offline  
post #380 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 04:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Hyrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Eastern Massachusetts
Posts: 2,572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post
So I do hope JVC gets all the glitches out for their next offering (and i also like its short throw ratio, since I am getting addicted to watching from very close, 1.07 screen widths = 50 deg viewing angle). Thinking about getting a larger HP screen (128x72)!
I don't want this to be taken as a criticism of you or your conclusions. I don't doubt you saw what you saw, and would never try to imply that you were mistaken. However it is too bad that you chose to test the Vango with one of what I consider to be one of the worst transfers I've seen in a long time. I don't think 'LotM' really gives any projector a chance to look good.

One reviewer (http://www.avrev.com/blu-ray-movie-d...-cut-1992.html) said of this movie
Quote:
"The contrast level is weak, leading many scenes to lack resolution. Nighttime sequences are all but lost. Unresolved blacks sink any detail that might be present in the shadows. Night shots appear gray instead of dark. Details are improved from the standard DVD, but they are far from high-definition quality. The forest lacks any type of true detail. Leaves and branches blur together in most of the sequences. Textures are also improved but don’t pop as well as they should. The intact film grain is what provides texture for this image. Edges are blurred, which I still prefer over edge enhancement. Colors are bold. The red coats of the British can always be seen in detail. The greens of the forest are not top notch, but they hold up fairly well."
I think they really screwed up mastering that movie - either its gamma, contrast, or something else is really messed up. I think it makes sense to take a look at how a projector deals with a bad transfer, but I don't really watch that many movies that look as bad to me as LoTM. Therefore I also try testing with movies that have good transfers. The Black Knight and a number of other movies, for example, looks amazing on the Vango (as well as on your JVC or the Mits).

In conclusion, I agree it would be great if the Vango had another couple hundred Lumens, and I'm sure that 'LoTM' in particular would benefit from a lot more light. Like yourself, I'm using a Da-Lite HP screen which really helps in this regard, but more lumens would be nice.
Hyrax is offline  
post #381 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 06:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyrax View Post

I don't want this to be taken as a criticism of you or your conclusions. I don't doubt you saw what you saw, and would never try to imply that you were mistaken. However it is too bad that you chose to test the Vango with one of what I consider to be one of the worst transfers I've seen in a long time. I don't think 'LotM' really gives any projector a chance to look good.

One reviewer (http://www.avrev.com/blu-ray-movie-d...-cut-1992.html) said of this movie

I think they really screwed up mastering that movie - either its gamma, contrast, or something else is really messed up. I think it makes sense to take a look at how a projector deals with a bad transfer, but I don't really watch that many movies that look as bad to me as LoTM. Therefore I also try testing with movies that have good transfers. The Black Knight and a number of other movies, for example, looks amazing on the Vango (as well as on your JVC or the Mits).

In conclusion, I agree it would be great if the Vango had another couple hundred Lumens, and I'm sure that 'LoTM' in particular would benefit from a lot more light. Like yourself, I'm using a Da-Lite HP screen which really helps in this regard, but more lumens would be nice.

Very reasonable comments, and I certainly don't take offense at any of them. (I'm an academic and used to everybody disagreeing with each other, even the best of friends!) I would very much like to have a Vango in my room and try it out on my screen with a variety of material. Dark Knight is certainly a good BD, and makes most displays look good.

I do note, though, that LoTM looked very good on the Mits and Samsung, and on my RS20 (at home on my 126"diag HP). But as LG and Tom H noted, this may have just been because of brightness (which a HP screen like yours and mine would presumably help out the Vango considerably). That's why, of course, it would be great to have one in my room for a try out. It's too bad that it's so hard to manage this. The one person in Berkeley who I know that had one--which I MIGHT have been able to borrow--doesn't have it any longer.
millerwill is online now  
post #382 of 858 Old 05-05-2011, 08:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
I have a slightly used almost brand new copy of LOTM for sale. I paid almost $30 for it and I will sell it cheap. I hope a moderator doesn't censor this post and issue me an infraction point. Seems I watched the forest deer killing scene about 30 times this weeek from Tuesday after through Weds morning. I really have no idea what is on the rest of the disc but I did see a quick glimpse of indians killing non indians. Not my cup of tea. Tell you what, I will throw in a free copy of the 5th Element. I have about 8 different versions of DVD and Blue of that baby. At least after many years of viewing various clips that videophiles uses a meets to evaluate projectors, I actually wached the whole thing. Not bad. I have watched it 2 or 3 times. Aziz (however its spelled) LIGHT. Usually at a meet or at the race track with my racing friends, if I yell Aziz Light, someone lights my cigar. God I just love the AVS forum.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #383 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 06:26 AM
Senior Member
 
Kevin Snyder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Shorewood, MN
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Mark,

I always thought it was 'Aziz, LIGHT!"

Am I incorrect? Can someone help out with this???

I'm not allowed to watch the movie anymore as I yell this out randomly for days following a viewing.

Kevin
Kevin Snyder is offline  
post #384 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 08:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Hyrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Eastern Massachusetts
Posts: 2,572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Definitely Aziz. The quote is even on the IMDB page for the movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119116/).

A while back I saw a picture of a Bud Light beer bottle altered to say Aziz Light.
Hyrax is offline  
post #385 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 11:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Sounds right, Tom. There have been a number of comments, though, about the lumens of led pj's been 'more effective', or something, than an equivalent # of lumens from lamps. Is there anything to this? I don't think I'm convinced.

See Helmholtz-Kolrausch Effect
Pete is offline  
post #386 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 11:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,752
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Liked: 401
zombie10k is online now  
post #387 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 01:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
It looks like someone on my sales staff hard at work.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #388 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 01:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

See Helmholtz-Kolrausch Effect

OK, thanks for this. Claim is that "led pj's appear to be ~25% brighter than lamp-based pj's with the same CIE lumen output". So 400 lumens from the Vango would be ~ the equivalent to a 500 lumen lamp-based pj. Interesting.
millerwill is online now  
post #389 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 05:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TomHuffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 6,479
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post
OK, thanks for this. Claim is that "led pj's appear to be ~25% brighter than lamp-based pj's with the same CIE lumen output". So 400 lumens from the Vango would be ~ the equivalent to a 500 lumen lamp-based pj. Interesting.
This is a little misleading because it is a comparison of apples and oranges. The M/K Effect states that saturated colors will appear brighter than colors of lower saturation of similar luminance. The way this effect is applied to LED projectors to justify the claim that they have a higher subjective brightness is by comparing an LED projector's native gamut with that of a traditional projector. Of course, LED projectors have a much wider gamut.

I went in search of the source of this claim about greater perceived brightness for LED projectors, and other than marketing material by Runco, which rather enthusiastically claims that LED projectors will appear 1.6 times as bright using their "Q-lumens", I ran across what seems to be the one quasi-scientific paper on the subject by the National Central University of Taiwan and Delta Electronics. Unfortunately, you have to pay $15 to read the full article, which I did.

They conclude that an LED projector can provide 25%-30% additional perceived brightness over a standard UHP-based projector. here are the two projectors they compared that led to this conclusion.

LED projector
Red Green Blue White
x 0.705 0.200 0.145 0.325
y 0.292 0.731 0.040 0.327
UHP Projector
Red Green Blue White
x 0.640 0.308 0.150 0.304
y 0.329 0.591 0.065 0.305

If you prefer a visual to these numbers, then consider this. The circles are LED and the triangles are UHP.



So, yes, using an LED with its native gamut will probably produce an image that appears 25%-30% brighter than than you would expect from the lumens rating. However, this is due to the fact that the native gamut of LED projectors is much wider, providing much more deeply saturated colors. Calibrate an LED projector to Rec. 709 and this effect will vanish.

BTW, an easy way to see the M/K effect is to compare a 50% gray field with a 100% red field. Assuming the source is reasonably calibrated, these two fields should measure about the same level of luminance. However, the red field will appear subjectively brighter.

Tom Huffman
ChromaPure Software/AccuPel Video Signal Generators
ISF/THX Calibrations
Springfield, MO

TomHuffman is offline  
post #390 of 858 Old 05-06-2011, 06:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 628 Post(s)
Liked: 589
So I assume you won't be spending $15 to buy at half price my copy of LOTM?

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Epson , Stewart Firehawk G3



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off