Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 332 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
Thread Tools
post #9931 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 07:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post
I'm lucky. I can tolerate just about any type of 3D - even God-awful anaglyph - without real issues. I can watch the Epson 5030's 3D for hours. But my LGs are easiest on the eyes. The LG LCD that I use for 3D editing is utterly painless, but 3D contrast blows. LG's OLED passive 3D, however, puts all the other 3D displays I've ever owned to shame. True black, infinite contrast, silky smooth 3D - these help me overlook any other flaws with the set. The closest I came to it in terms of contrast on a projector was the JVC RS45, but the JVC's 3D sucked, and it never truly passed the hand puppet test. There was always tell-tale gray in the black. Also, if I'm dead center vertically with the OLED, it's passive 3D is the most ghost-free 3D (short of DLP) that I've ever seen. And DLP can't come within a country light year of OLED's contrast.

As a long time big screen user, I know there's no real substitute for a projector's image size, but as a new believer in the beauty of true black and true infinite contrast, it's hard for me to want to watch anything else now. It's Sophie's Choice for this tortured tech nerd.

I have had 3 different 120hz 3d gaming monitors, a LG Passive 3D tv , a Benq W7000 DLP projector and now the JVC X500 PJ. Of all of those the Benq W7000 and LG were the easiest on the eyes. My big complaint with the Benq beside contrast was the DLP link, it really sucks, for me it did. The JVC is not to bad, the link with the glasses is excellent as is the contrast. Gravity was pretty good actually, I did have to take several breaks, but the image was spectacular. But for ease on the eyes the Benq was really not to bad.

James Reid:D
cardoski is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9932 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 08:04 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 8,581
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 813 Post(s)
Liked: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
Everyone here seems to accept the 1100 lumens calibrated figure as written in stone. Art found it was closer to 1300 lumens calibrated in high (laser )mode. I have no idea which figure is more accurate -- 1100 or 1300 calibrated lumens and I doubt anyone else at the moment does either.

As far as brightness in 3D is concerned PC had this to say:

"As is true of all 3D systems, the light that reaches your eyes is cut substantially compared to 2D. But it doesn't cut light quite as much as most projectors. Let's assume you have the LS10000 set up using the middle of the zoom on a 120" diagonal screen with 1.0 gain, you can use 3D Cinema (the dimmest 3D mode) and still get 6.2 fL actually reaching your eyes."

So what does 6.2 fL translate into using a 2.8 gain screen -- 18fL?

I doubt that the LS10000 will meet my needs but it has a combination of features that comes pretty close. As far as I can see projector technology is at least heading in the right direction.

I am still waiting for end users to get their hands on these projectors and comment on the questions being asked here. It makes me wonder if Epson is having some problems outside of supply and demand issues. Besides a few review units this projector is very conspicuous by its absence.
I think the max gain from a 2.8 gain HP is closer to 2.0. Still 12.4FL for 3D is pretty good. I still use a 2.8 gain HP in my family room setup, but talking about HP screens is kind of a mute point, since we have not been able to get HP screens for many months.

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me: Mike@AVScience.com
Brands we sell: http://avscience.com/brands/ 
Call for B-stock projectors
Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI, Falcon, DNP & more.
RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Tech., MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech, Denon, Marantz & Yamaha .
AV Science Sales 5 is online now  
post #9933 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 08:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post
As a long time big screen user, I know there's no real substitute for a projector's image size, but as a new believer in the beauty of true black and true infinite contrast, it's hard for me to want to watch anything else now. It's Sophie's Choice for this tortured tech nerd.
That's actually one reason I haven't upgraded our every day TVs to a truly high end flat panel, let alone OLED.
I don't want to have to see what's possible and what I'm missing on the bigger screen.
(And I don't really watch TV shows).

That said, forum member Conan was originally so enamored of his OLED that I remember him saying this was goodbye to projection, which can't compete. But he recently mentioned that after living with the OLED he came back to the importance of image size that you get with projection. (Not to speak for him, but that is what I understand from his posts).
R Harkness is online now  
post #9934 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 09:40 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,406
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
I think the max gain from a 2.8 gain HP is closer to 2.0. Still 12.4FL for 3D is pretty good. I still use a 2.8 gain HP in my family room setup, but talking about HP screens is kind of a mute point, since we have not been able to get HP screens for many months.
I've read a number of times over the years that the 2.8 was closer to 3.0 gain, so curious where you are getting the 2.0 figure? My own tests compared to my ST130 would suggest a gain much closer to 3.0, not 2.0.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is offline  
post #9935 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 09:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 186
Yes. I've read that 3.0 number, too. Seems right to me.
Toe likes this.
Joseph Clark is offline  
post #9936 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 10:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,679
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 331
I think he's referring to the accucal screen report:

http://www.accucalhd.com/documents/a...een_report.pdf

Also, you guys need to remember both the 2.4 and 2.8 are extremely sensitive to projector placement and seating position. I doubt most end users have it set up to get anywhere near the claimed gain. From my own personal testing (with both materials), I don't think 3.0 is a valid gain number to use.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Crazy Projector Journey!

For Sale: Marantz VP-15S1 1080p High End DLP Projector - $1295
Seegs108 is online now  
post #9937 of 9957 Old Yesterday, 11:54 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,406
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I think he's referring to the accucal screen report:

http://www.accucalhd.com/documents/a...een_report.pdf

Also, you guys need to remember both the 2.4 and 2.8 are extremely sensitive to projector placement and seating position. I doubt most end users have it set up to get anywhere near the claimed gain. From my own personal testing (with both materials), I don't think 3.0 is a valid gain number to use.
That report was dismissed immediately as any sort of reliable indicator of max HP gain due to the measurement being taken with a ceiling mounted projector if you read the report. If the projector was optimally placed, as you allude too, the number would be much higher. I have also tested both materials and an actual 3.0 gain rating with an optimally placed projector would not surprise me from what I saw. Either way, the gain is certainly much closer to 3.0 than 2.0 with the projector placed as close to eye level as possible. There is also a clear max brightness advantage to the 2.8 vs the 2.4 ( although the 2.4 maintains its brightness better over a wider seating range)

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP

Last edited by Toe; Today at 12:02 AM.
Toe is offline  
post #9938 of 9957 Old Today, 12:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I think he's referring to the accucal screen report:

http://www.accucalhd.com/documents/a...een_report.pdf

Also, you guys need to remember both the 2.4 and 2.8 are extremely sensitive to projector placement and seating position. I doubt most end users have it set up to get anywhere near the claimed gain. From my own personal testing (with both materials), I don't think 3.0 is a valid gain number to use.
We've spent a lot of time talking about the HP's cone of brightness. When I did my testing, I saw the results of moving off axis quite clearly. I compared the HP sample with a Vutec Silverstar sample and the Stewart Firehawk (my existing screen at the time). The SS and the Firehawk were angular reflective and the HP retro-reflective. As I moved around I could see how brightness varied with distance and angle relative to the projection beam. From a point of view near the projection lens, the HP was super bright and the Firehawk and SS were far dimmer. As I moved away, the Firehawk and the HP became the same brightness, then the advantage moved to the Firehawk. It's not simple of course, but for those who knew what they were doing, it was altogether possible to get a gain near maximum with the HP, at least with a seat or two. I believe mine was probably close to 3 originally, because my head was so close to the lens.

The HP is like everything else in home theater. Ignorance of limitations probably won't yield optimal results. It's academic now, unless someone is lucky enough to find a used 2.8 HP somewhere.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is offline  
post #9939 of 9957 Old Today, 12:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
That's actually one reason I haven't upgraded our every day TVs to a truly high end flat panel, let alone OLED.
I don't want to have to see what's possible and what I'm missing on the bigger screen.
(And I don't really watch TV shows).

That said, forum member Conan was originally so enamored of his OLED that I remember him saying this was goodbye to projection, which can't compete. But he recently mentioned that after living with the OLED he came back to the importance of image size that you get with projection. (Not to speak for him, but that is what I understand from his posts).
I don't doubt he feels that way. I'll probably strike a balance between the projection room and the OLED one day, too. I can't see giving it up completely. But for now, it's not much of a contest. To borrow my favorite expression from Firefly, OLED is SHINY!

Sorry, Rich. That's a TV reference. But a lot of folks here will know what it means, and it applies especially to OLED.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is offline  
post #9940 of 9957 Old Today, 12:15 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 390 Post(s)
Liked: 411
with my rack setup, I keep the 3D projectors very close to eye level for max gain. The brightness is good between the 4 seats in a curved setup across the 142" 16:9

JC - It's been a few years, I don't recall - did you ever demo the Sony HMZ-T1 headsetup? I still have this from a while back but don't use it much since it's not very comfortable. The 3D is very bright, no x-talk and the OLED's have great contrast. I think Sony is on the 3rd version of the original headset. the idea is neat and it definitely looks good, just needs to be much lighter.

zombie10k is online now  
post #9941 of 9957 Old Today, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,572
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I like the longer calibration hold and longer "fresh lamp" lumen output the lasers have but I think you're right about the availability and limited end user replacement possibilities that lasers have. This is bad for projectors, especially if we can only expect 10000 hours out of it in high lamp mode which the Epson quotes (still only 1100 D65 lumens, which dims over time). From what others have told me, the light the phosphor creates when ignited cannot be used to create a color gamut as large what we can get from LEDs.

Lasers also seem to pose a threat to single chip DLP projectors too. The reason we're able to use LEDs with single chip DLP projectors stems from the fact that they can replicate how a color wheel works. The LEDs can do sequential color. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think a laser/phosphor wheel can do this. It creates yellow light that is then filtered to get red and green and another laser is used (without a phosphor wheel) just for blue as this is the spectrum of color that is typically the weakest coming from yellow light/a UHP lamp (makes sense, right?). The laser/phosphor wheel combo dims over their lifetime and creates a limited native color gamut over LEDs (it seems the native color gamut is more reminiscent of a UHP lamp) due to the yellow light that's created being very similar to what a UHP lamp puts out.

LEDs can create a longer lasting light source at full brightness (which seems to be their entire life span as in they don't dim), a larger color gamut, are single chip DLP friendly, hold calibrations longer, can be modulated dynamically and used as a dynamic iris implementation along with the lasers, can be legally swapped out by an end user as I'm sure a bulb-like cage can be made that can be simply swapped out, and higher lumen output LEDs are currently out there (ala Sim2).

I personally find LEDs more interesting and a more friendly solution with less issues with the things most of us enthusiasts want from a light source. The one issue I don't like about them is all of the LED projectors I've owned (5 different LED models) is that all of them had an annoying "buzz" sound when the LEDs were called for 100% light output (or some integer close to 100%). I think it has to do with the high amperage the LED's are pulling at/near 100%. 30 amps is what the spec sheets say. But this is low voltage on the LED controller board, not from the power supply connected to your wall, aka 120/220+ circuit in your home. I hope a redesign or high sound dampening can get rid of this issue.
I agree that LEDs would be a great solution for projectors over lamps and probably lasers; however, so far they are way too expensive. The only under $10K HT projector with LEDs I can think of is the Optoma HD91.

LEDs do dim over time just as lasers do. Right now they seem to have a longer lifespan and probably don't dim as much. In the future this may be reversed. One of my present projectors is a DLP hybrid (laser and LED) and it supposedly has a life of 20,000 hours -- warrantied for 10,000 hours and that's for both the LEDs and the laser.

Here's some information about LEDs and how they dim over time:

"LEDs and their Dimming Scenario

LED lights work via semiconductors and they don’t make contact or melt the plastic they’re housed in --- only a tiny amount of heat is being emitted. It’s essential to know this process. Light is made due to electrons that have been energized and when an electric current is transported to the diodes. These same electrons move from material to another but must be required to release energy before another material can take them in.

It’s through this energy release that creates light in the form of photons while ejecting a bit of heat in the process. After an extended period of time, the semiconductors of the LED light will wear out and will start to dim. It’s critical to know that LED lights simply just don’t “burn out” like those of traditional incandescent bulbs. Instead, LED lights go through a “lumen depreciation” process where it slowly begins to dim more over time.

Lifespan of an LED

A scientific test that the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) conducts to figure out the lifespan of a bulb is called the “LM80.” It involves calculating the time it takes for an LED light to dim. Engineers would have the bulb running for several months to attain a precise reading on the rate of decay of the light.

Utilizing those figures, they can make a calculation at the point in which the bulb starts to dim at 70% of its starting brightness. Such point is known as“L70,” today’s standard of an LED lifespan. If you see an LED bulb that says it can last for 20,000 hours, it means it’ll take 20,000 hours for it to dim to its 70% brightness.

This shows that LEDs do dim after a period of time. They’re considered to be most durable and safest lighting choice available today. Furthermore, they’re cost effective, energy efficient, and friendly to the environment. Like any device that rely on electrical material, anything can happen. The good news is most LED products are backed with multi-year warranties to cover any mechanical failures."


Here's how Sony promotes their laser projector (business).

"Laser Light Source 3LCD Projector
VPL-FHZ55
A laser-illuminated projector that uses less resources and no mercury with better energy efficiency, the VPL-FHZ55 is also very convenient. It offers up to 20,000 hours(*2) of operation without maintenance or parts replacement. Other conveniences are; near instantaneous 6 seconds start up; peace of mind operation without worries for a sudden lamp failure; manual lens shift optically brings images into desired position; and the projector can be installed at any angle vertically or horizontally, for flexible 360° installation. The unprecedented brightness of 4,000-lumen as a lamp-free projector is practically bright and vibrant for many of commercial applications.

*2 Approximate time until brightness has declined to half the original level. Only a guideline; actual time varies by conditions and environment of use."


I think we'll see Sony laser HT projectors in the next year or two with similar promotion.
d.j. likes this.

Last edited by Deja Vu; Today at 08:16 AM.
Deja Vu is online now  
post #9942 of 9957 Old Today, 08:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,679
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
I agree that LEDs would be a great solution for projectors over lamps and probably lasers; however, so far they are way too expensive. The only under $10K HT projector with LEDs I can think of is the Optoma HD91.

LEDs do dim over time just as lasers do. Right now they seem to have a longer lifespan and probably don't dim as much. In the future this may be reversed. One of my present projectors is a DLP hybrid (laser and LED) and it supposedly has a life of 20,000 hours -- warrantied for 10,000 hours and that's for both the LEDs and the laser.

Here's some information about LEDs and how they dim over time:

"LEDs and their Dimming Scenario

LED lights work via semiconductors and they don’t make contact or melt the plastic they’re housed in --- only a tiny amount of heat is being emitted. It’s essential to know this process. Light is made due to electrons that have been energized and when an electric current is transported to the diodes. These same electrons move from material to another but must be required to release energy before another material can take them in.

It’s through this energy release that creates light in the form of photons while ejecting a bit of heat in the process. After an extended period of time, the semiconductors of the LED light will wear out and will start to dim. It’s critical to know that LED lights simply just don’t “burn out” like those of traditional incandescent bulbs. Instead, LED lights go through a “lumen depreciation” process where it slowly begins to dim more over time.

Lifespan of an LED

A scientific test that the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) conducts to figure out the lifespan of a bulb is called the “LM80.” It involves calculating the time it takes for an LED light to dim. Engineers would have the bulb running for several months to attain a precise reading on the rate of decay of the light.

Utilizing those figures, they can make a calculation at the point in which the bulb starts to dim at 70% of its starting brightness. Such point is known as“L70,” today’s standard of an LED lifespan. If you see an LED bulb that says it can last for 20,000 hours, it means it’ll take 20,000 hours for it to dim to its 70% brightness.

This shows that LEDs do dim after a period of time. They’re considered to be most durable and safest lighting choice available today. Furthermore, they’re cost effective, energy efficient, and friendly to the environment. Like any device that rely on electrical material, anything can happen. The good news is most LED products are backed with multi-year warranties to cover any mechanical failures."


Here's how Sony promotes their laser projector (business).

"Laser Light Source 3LCD Projector
VPL-FHZ55
A laser-illuminated projector that uses less resources and no mercury with better energy efficiency, the VPL-FHZ55 is also very convenient. It offers up to 20,000 hours(*2) of operation without maintenance or parts replacement. Other conveniences are; near instantaneous 6 seconds start up; peace of mind operation without worries for a sudden lamp failure; manual lens shift optically brings images into desired position; and the projector can be installed at any angle vertically or horizontally, for flexible 360° installation. The unprecedented brightness of 4,000-lumen as a lamp-free projector is practically bright and vibrant for many of commercial applications.

*2 Approximate time until brightness has declined to half the original level. Only a guideline; actual time varies by conditions and environment of use."


I think we'll see Sony laser HT projectors in the next year or two with similar promotion.
That is still hugely better than lasers. That means they seem to dim at around 1/4 the rate the phosphor wheel/laser combo does. And they ARE NOT expensive. They just had a huge early adopter fee associated with them. I remember reading the Phlatlight PT 120 module only costing somewhere between $300-$400. Like I said, there's a whole list of benefits LED illumination brings over lasers. And with Sim2 finding a way to get 1000+ lumens from them, I see LEDs as a much better alternative right now.
mbw23air likes this.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Crazy Projector Journey!

For Sale: Marantz VP-15S1 1080p High End DLP Projector - $1295
Seegs108 is online now  
post #9943 of 9957 Old Today, 09:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 112
I have LED lights growing tomatoes in my garage, I also have them on my house for Christmas, they are in my TVs, seems only right to have them in my Projector.

James Reid:D
cardoski is online now  
post #9944 of 9957 Old Today, 09:49 AM
Pip
Senior Member
 
Pip's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

.....The HP is like everything else in home theater. Ignorance of limitations probably won't yield optimal results. It's academic now, unless someone is lucky enough to find a used 2.8 HP somewhere.
I rest my case.

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I ask again - what's up with Dalite? or any of the new screen companies for that matter? The 2.8 was manufactured for over 10 years - very cheaply and problem free. It was made in a factory - with machines. It wasn't hammered out at the bottom of the Rhine by Alberich from magical ingredients. This is 2014 - almost 2015. It can be manufactured again.

Sorry for the rant.

Pip
Pip is offline  
post #9945 of 9957 Old Today, 10:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,572
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
That is still hugely better than lasers. That means they seem to dim at around 1/4 the rate the phosphor wheel/laser combo does. And they ARE NOT expensive. They just had a huge early adopter fee associated with them. I remember reading the Phlatlight PT 120 module only costing somewhere between $300-$400. Like I said, there's a whole list of benefits LED illumination brings over lasers. And with Sim2 finding a way to get 1000+ lumens from them, I see LEDs as a much better alternative right now.
We'll have to wait and see if Sim2 actually gets 1000+ calibrated lumens out of their LED projectors. The owners of the M.150 claim they only get 600 calibrated lumens out of their projectors, yet Sim2 claims much, much more.

Here's a comment from an owner:

"Mine is only 600 lumens after calibration and I am using 100" Firehawk SST screen. I think that for your 120" 0,85 gain screen it will be too dark."

That's 1/2 or only a little more than 1/2 what the Epson will do (depending which review you want to believe) and the Epson is less than a third of the price and has an E-shift-like feature, effective dynamic dimming of the laser, much, much higher native on/off contrast and will accept and downscale 4K Blu-ray. $8K compared to $28K -- the Epson looks like a bargain to me. Now if it would handle 3D like the M.150 does, but brighter, then I'd probably buy one.
d.j. likes this.

Last edited by Deja Vu; Today at 10:47 AM.
Deja Vu is online now  
post #9946 of 9957 Old Today, 11:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,679
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
We'll have to wait and see if Sim2 actually gets 1000+ calibrated lumens out of their LED projectors. The owners of the M.150 claim they only get 600 calibrated lumens out of their projectors, yet Sim2 claims much, much more.

Here's a comment from an owner:

"Mine is only 600 lumens after calibration and I am using 100" Firehawk SST screen. I think that for your 120" 0,85 gain screen it will be too dark."

That's 1/2 or only a little more than 1/2 what the Epson will do (depending which review you want to believe) and the Epson is less than a third of the price and has an E-shift-like feature, effective dynamic dimming of the laser, much, much higher native on/off contrast and will accept and downscale 4K Blu-ray. $8K compared to $28K -- the Epson looks like a bargain to me. Now if it would handle 3D like the M.150 does, but brighter, then I'd probably buy one.
Let's wait and see what Zombie measures when he gets his Sim2 Nero 3 from AVScience. You're quoting from a much older model.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #9947 of 9957 Old Today, 11:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
I think the max gain from a 2.8 gain HP is closer to 2.0. Still 12.4FL for 3D is pretty good. I still use a 2.8 gain HP in my family room setup, but talking about HP screens is kind of a mute point, since we have not been able to get HP screens for many months.
I see I'm not alone in wondering; has anyone heard when, if ever, we will be able to order HP screens? I waited too long to order my 2.39 scope screen and I'm hoping DaLite will step up and start making them again. If materials have gone up, why not just charge a little more for them? From the posts here at AVS, there is clearly a market...

Last edited by humbland; Today at 11:35 AM.
humbland is online now  
post #9948 of 9957 Old Today, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 29
The problem with measuring LED lumens using conventional lamp measuring technique is that it fails to factor in the H-K effect (Helmholtz-Kohlrausch). One must multiply the number by about 130% to arrive at LED brightness equivalent to UHP lamp brightness. This is not Hocus Pocus...it's a very real phenomenon and failure to understand it short-changes the technology as well as the uninformed consumer who may see a low brightness number associated with LED and conclude that it is inadequate.
Pete is offline  
post #9949 of 9957 Old Today, 12:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,679
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
The problem with measuring LED lumens using conventional lamp measuring technique is that it fails to factor in the H-K effect (Helmholtz-Kohlrausch). One must multiply the number by about 130% to arrive at LED brightness equivalent to UHP lamp brightness. This is not Hocus Pocus...it's a very real phenomenon and failure to understand it short-changes the technology as well as the uninformed consumer who may see a low brightness number associated with LED and conclude that it is inadequate.
This doesn't apply when one is calibrating for Rec 709. This should only be factored if you plan on using the LEDs in their native color gamut. And typically speaking, one would almost always be using Rec 709.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Crazy Projector Journey!

For Sale: Marantz VP-15S1 1080p High End DLP Projector - $1295
Seegs108 is online now  
post #9950 of 9957 Old Today, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 411 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
I see I'm not alone in wondering; has anyone heard when, if ever, we will be able to order HP screens? I waited too long to order my 2.39 scope screen and I'm hoping DaLite will step up and start making them again. If materials have gone up, why not just charge a little more for them? From the posts here at AVS, there is clearly a market...

No. Da Lite reps have not said when - if ever, the High Power will return. Could be 1, 3 or 6 months. Or never. Better pick a back up screen idea.

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
post #9951 of 9957 Old Today, 01:15 PM
Pip
Senior Member
 
Pip's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
No. Da Lite reps have not said when - if ever, the High Power will return. Could be 1, 3 or 6 months. Or never. Better pick a back up screen idea.
Elunevision has two 2.4 screen materials: Reference Pure Bright, and Vivid Pro Cinema White. I have the Vivid Pro (and a High Power 2.8)
The Vivid Pro is retro-reflective. I haven't measured it, but side by side gain seems very close to my High Power. However, the material is nowhere near the quality of my High Power. The Vivid Pro substrate is much thinner, and translucent. The surface is very rough, and the pearlescent particles are very easily abraded off the surface, leaving dark patches without any retro-reflective particles. There would be no way to clean this screen without destroying it.

The High Power 2.8, on the other hand is bullet proof. Surface is completely smooth - very easily wiped clean. The substrate is very thick, heavy, and completely opaque.

I have heard (from Elunevision) that the Reference Pure Bright material is much higher quality than the Vivid Pro.

Pip
Pip is offline  
post #9952 of 9957 Old Today, 01:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pip View Post
Elunevision has two 2.4 screen materials: Reference Pure Bright, and Vivid Pro Cinema White. I have the Vivid Pro (and a High Power 2.8)
The Vivid Pro is retro-reflective. I haven't measured it, but side by side gain seems very close to my High Power. However, the material is nowhere near the quality of my High Power. The Vivid Pro substrate is much thinner, and translucent. The surface is very rough, and the pearlescent particles are very easily abraded off the surface, leaving dark patches without any retro-reflective particles. There would be no way to clean this screen without destroying it.

The High Power 2.8, on the other hand is bullet proof. Surface is completely smooth - very easily wiped clean. The substrate is very thick, heavy, and completely opaque.

I have heard (from Elunevision) that the Reference Pure Bright material is much higher quality than the Vivid Pro.

Pip

I have the reference 4K Elunevison 1.0 gain screen, it is excellent. Zero texturing, perfectly smooth. However I do wish it had gain, their 2.4 reference screen intrigues me. But I have heard nothing about it from a user.

James Reid:D
cardoski is online now  
post #9953 of 9957 Old Today, 02:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked: 394
This projector-techno-literate thread seems the right place to ask this:

There have been numerous reports concerning studies that show exposure to computers and mobile device screens can upset
our circadian rhythm and negatively impact the quality of our sleep. Here is yet another article:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/open-the...ime-1419272534

"But the type of short-wavelength enriched light, also known as blue light, that many backlit devices emit is especially powerful at suppressing the release of melatonin, the hormone that helps bring on sleep, experts say."


My question concerns how this relates to projector light. Would I presume correctly that watching a projector image would carry the same liabilities at night as a TV or computer, in terms of emitting the dreaded short-wavelength blue light?

I tend to watch something on my projector before bed time, hence my interest in the answer. Thanks.
R Harkness is online now  
post #9954 of 9957 Old Today, 02:33 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,562
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 468
Rich,

Good question. I've had insomnia issues at times the last couple of years and two sleep specialist doctors have told me to avoid as much light as possible an hour before bed. In fact, they said to stick to reading with a low light to your back before bed. However, I tend to start to drift off to sleep while watching TV or especially on the projector. Something about a dark room and display at night easily causes me to often get sleepy. I guess it probably just depends on the person and maybe I would sleep even better doing something like reading instead before bed.

DavidHir is online now  
post #9955 of 9957 Old Today, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 411 Post(s)
Liked: 358
I don't think it's the light that keeps me up after watching the projector at night. It's getting all jacked up watching " Crank " or " Lone Survivor " that keeps me awake .

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
post #9956 of 9957 Old Today, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,679
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
I don't think it's the light that keeps me up after watching the projector at night. It's getting all jacked up watching " Crank " or " Lone Survivor " that keeps me awake .
I would imagine the bottle of wine imbibed counters this.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Crazy Projector Journey!

For Sale: Marantz VP-15S1 1080p High End DLP Projector - $1295
Seegs108 is online now  
post #9957 of 9957 Unread Today, 03:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 411 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I would imagine the bottle of wine imbibed counters this.

Absolutely. The night I screened " Goldfinger " with vodka martinis ( Belvedere ) - shaken, not stirred - no one had trouble sleeping.

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
post #9958 of 9957 Unread Today, 05:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
Absolutely. The night I screened " Goldfinger " with vodka martinis ( Belvedere ) - shaken, not stirred - no one had trouble sleeping.
Damn, you sound like a fun host! Wish I was there.
R Harkness is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Benq W7000 Home Projection System , Jvc Dla Rs55 Bundle , Jvc Dla Rs45 Home Theater Projector 1080p Hdmi , Epson V11h502020 Powerlite Home Cinema 3020e 2d And 3d 1080p Wireless Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Epson 5010 Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 3010 2d And 3d Projector V11h421020 , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector , Mitsubishi Hc7900dw Home Theater 3d Projector , Mitsubishi Hc8000dbl Dlp 3d Home Theater Projector With Spare Lamp 1300 Ansi 12 6 Lbs , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector
Gear in this thread - V11h421020 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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