Panasonic PT-AE4000 MSRP $1999 - Page 269 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #8041 of 8536 Old 03-27-2012, 10:04 PM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Yes, I'm confident in defiance to me...

Hubris, they name is zillch! You think he is posting pics just to defy you and not actually to show the images contained in the pics!
cybrsage is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #8042 of 8536 Old 03-27-2012, 10:05 PM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverfaithful View Post

How are your black levels so black and on my 4000 I notice a big difference from my screen frame and the black level my 4000 produces as you can see in my pictures above?

I bought one of the demo units and it came already calibrated out of the box would be my guess (with a whopping 8 hours of use on it). Other than that, I have no idea.
cybrsage is offline  
post #8043 of 8536 Old 03-27-2012, 10:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
neverfaithful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Yes, I'm confident in defiance to me you will continue to post your low resolution, jpeg compressed, AWB, auto exposed, hand held, off axis, cellphone screen shots. It makes me chuckle each time you do so.

There's nothing I can do to stop you, true, just like there's nothing you can do to stop me from asking you to please stop wasting forum space and pointing out how worthless it is due to limitations of camera, lens, compression, forum resolution, scaling artifacts, dynamic range compression, "auto leveling", auto color correction/white balance, etc, etc...

[Thank goodness the vast majority of the 8,000 or so posters of this thread understand the folly in doing so and "get it", at least.]

I'm glad I made you chuckle therefore, I will post more later when I have time, you know what i changed my mind. I love my low resolution off axis, cellphone, hand held screen shots from my AE4000. In the future, send a person a PM and ask, don't order them to do something that will never work but only make me do the total opposite. You should know this by now in life.


A wise man once said do not worry about what others do just worry about yourself.

Rich
neverfaithful is offline  
post #8044 of 8536 Old 03-27-2012, 10:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
neverfaithful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

I bought one of the demo units and it came already calibrated out of the box would be my guess (with a whopping 8 hours of use on it). Other than that, I have no idea.

Oh ok thanks.

Rich
neverfaithful is offline  
post #8045 of 8536 Old 03-28-2012, 07:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
sog35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
How do I do vertical stretch? I want to stretch a cinemascope image to fit a 16:9 screen.

also when you clean the filter, do you take it apart (remove foam, paper filter) or do you just remove the entire filter and vaccume the whole thing?
sog35 is offline  
post #8046 of 8536 Old 03-30-2012, 01:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
CochiseGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Posts: 658
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

How do I do vertical stretch? I want to stretch a cinemascope image to fit a 16:9 screen.

also when you clean the filter, do you take it apart (remove foam, paper filter) or do you just remove the entire filter and vaccume the whole thing?

You don't want to do a vertical stretch, that will just stretch the image so it's distorted - really skinny faces on people. If you really want to fill a 16:9 screen you can try Zoom, under Lens Control in the projector menu - that will fill the screen's height, but the image will spill out over the vertical sides of the screen.

Do NOT take the filter apart! Just remove the entire filter and vacuum the outside - the side with foam and plastic. Don't vacuum the inside, the paper filter, as you can draw dust & particles in.
CochiseGuy is offline  
post #8047 of 8536 Old 03-30-2012, 10:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
sog35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by CochiseGuy View Post

You don't want to do a vertical stretch, that will just stretch the image so it's distorted - really skinny faces on people. If you really want to fill a 16:9 screen you can try Zoom, under Lens Control in the projector menu - that will fill the screen's height, but the image will spill out over the vertical sides of the screen.

Do NOT take the filter apart! Just remove the entire filter and vacuum the outside - the side with foam and plastic. Don't vacuum the inside, the paper filter, as you can draw dust & particles in.

Thanks for the advice. I decided to zoom and then use the digital masks for the right and left. I like the results very much, I really hate the black bars and I don't have a good solution for masking right now. The best thing is I can use the lens memory to switch from this zoomed view to the native view.

This will make cleaning the filter really easy
sog35 is offline  
post #8048 of 8536 Old 04-01-2012, 04:28 PM
Member
 
tigerninety's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello,

I'm a happy owner of a Panasonic AE4000u. Right now, I have it set up for a 130-in 2.35:1 screen; very nice.

However, as we remodel our basement, we're trying to assess if there would be any possibility of reorienting our viewing 90-degrees off from how we're set up now. It has advantages for floor space (would open things up to one side), but we'd be projecting across the short end of the room.

Bottom line is that I don't see any way, as things are now, to get an image larger than about 105-in (2.35:1), from about 11 feet lens-to-screen. And, (gulp) it's kinda hard to imagine losing more than 2 feet (especially when I was hoping to go even bigger).

So, I just need to ask, since there seem to be threads on the lens, are there any aftermarket add-on lenses that would allow the AE4000u to project a larger picture from a closer distance (e.g. the 130-in we have now from a closer distance than we use now)?

Thanks!

Tiger
tigerninety is offline  
post #8049 of 8536 Old 04-01-2012, 06:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Wow, I sit 13 feet from my 125" Scope screen (projector distance just over 13') and really any closer than 13 feet is too close (I.e. I have to shift my eyes to follow the action). Not sure about any lenses, but I would sit at that short distance with your current setup to see if you like it.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #8050 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 07:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Michael Sargent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Kemptville, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Use a mirror to increase the distance from projector to screen. There should be good information out there. I would search for "first surface mirror projector".

Mike
Michael Sargent is offline  
post #8051 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 10:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 281
The notion that one must use a first surface mirror, instead of a conventional, run-of-the-mill, glass front mirror, is true in theory, however speaking from experience I can tell you all that in actual practice a large, conventional mirror works just fine, if kept clean, and will cost a tiny fraction of the price.


For those of you who are quick to cast doubt and argue that a conventional mirror will create a faint, secondary reflection off the glass surface, in addition to the intended one off the silver surface below the glass, (which I'm not arguing it doesn't), I ask you this: Are you bothered when you stand in front of your bathroom mirror (or full length wall mirror) and gaze down at your reflected belt buckle's image, being delivered to your eyes at a 45 degree angle and off a conventional glass surfaced mirror, complete with a faint "added ghost reflection" from the glass surface?
[Go try it.] Not me; I dont see ghosting or a loss of contrast at all!

In a previous home setup, I bought, and used for years, a Erias Home Designs 30 in. x 24 in. Beveled Wall Mirror, at Home Depot for only $19.99, fully thinking at the time I bought it that it would be my temporary test mirror to help me figure out the logistics and limitations of using a mirror with a home built reflection apparatus.

I was so floored by the completely distortion-free reflection it cast, I never even looked into replacing it with a first surface design which would have been hundreds of dollars for that size, hard to find/ship, and more easily scratched when cleaned.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #8052 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 03:11 PM
Senior Member
 
Expat444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bay Area CA
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivartk View Post

Wow, I sit 13 feet from my 125" Scope screen (projector distance just over 13') and really any closer than 13 feet is too close (I.e. I have to shift my eyes to follow the action). Not sure about any lenses, but I would sit at that short distance with your current setup to see if you like it.

I sit 14.5' from a 153" screen and am still debating adding a closer row of seats
Expat444 is offline  
post #8053 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 04:01 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,214
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 250
m. zillch nailed it down,

1st Surface Mirrors were used because of their higher degree of reflectivity, not because they prevent any "double-imaging".

Most all "plastic" or "Glass" "Rear Surface" Mirrors have at most 1/8" space between the rear "aluminum" coating and the outside front. However....a 1st Surface mirror does also add the slightest degree of Magnification due to the surface's proximity to the viewer. This alone is what accounts for a 1st Surface having approx 97% reflectivity, and a 2nd Surface having 94-95%

As the originator of Light Fusion, the use of 2nd Surface Mirrors coated with DIY Screen paint, I can attest that there is no 'double-imaging". For quite a while, a few tried to foster that off as being the case...but time...and hundreds of comments to the contrary by end users dispelled any doubts that such was not the case.

A 1/8" x 4' x 8' 2nd Surface Plastic Mirror averages about $119.00 at outlets such a Piedmont Plastics / Laird Plastics.

1st Surface? $375-400.00

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #8054 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 04:16 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,214
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat444 View Post

I sit 14.5' from a 153" screen and am still debating adding a closer row of seats

You can do it, with 1080p content and the Panny's well balanced image.

In truth, the perception of width is related to distance. A 60"er viewed from 5' away looks exactly the same size as a 12'er viewed from 12'. In both instances, it's the tendency to shift the eyes during watching so closely that tends to distress some. What needs to happen is for one to "learn" how to watch such a large image. IMAX Theaters give "primers" to Attendees that state that the proper way to watch is to simply stare straight ahead and let things in the periphery come into your direct, forward line of sight. The image should fill your vision like a natural landscape.

"Ping-Ponging" syndrome occurs when you simply decide to try to glance about, and take every detail in at once. Do that in real life, like at a BBall Game or the Racetrack and you'll tire just as quickly.

The beauty of today's PJs with high Resolution and excellent Contrast is that images need not be overly bright to be vibrant, nor viewed from the old "1.75:1 - 2.0:1" seating distance ratios that older equipment and poorer quality signal sources...as well as poorer quality screen surfaces demanded.

All that being said...there are, and will be those who just don't care to sit so close to ay display that fills up most of their vision.

Expat444, if you add another row closer to the front, what you'll be doing is effectively giving yourself and others a choice. IMO...you won't be unhappy you did.

.....until you have to pay for the additional seating.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #8055 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 05:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Expat444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bay Area CA
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

You can do it, with 1080p content and the Panny's well balanced image.

In truth, the perception of width is related to distance. A 60"er viewed from 5' away looks exactly the same size as a 12'er viewed from 12'. In both instances, it's the tendency to shift the eyes during watching so closely that tends to distress some. What needs to happen is for one to "learn" how to watch such a large image. IMAX Theaters give "primers" to Attendees that state that the proper way to watch is to simply stare straight ahead and let things in the periphery come into your direct, forward line of sight. The image should fill your vision like a natural landscape.

"Ping-Ponging" syndrome occurs when you simply decide to try to glance about, and take every detail in at once. Do that in real life, like at a BBall Game or the Racetrack and you'll tire just as quickly.

The beauty of today's PJs with high Resolution and excellent Contrast is that images need not be overly bright to be vibrant, nor viewed from the old "1.75:1 - 2.0:1" seating distance ratios that older equipment and poorer quality signal sources...as well as poorer quality screen surfaces demanded.

All that being said...there are, and will be those who just don't care to sit so close to ay display that fills up most of their vision.

Expat444, if you add another row closer to the front, what you'll be doing is effectively giving yourself and others a choice. IMO...you won't be unhappy you did.

.....until you have to pay for the additional seating.

That's why we're going to try out the additional row using beanbag chairs as in reality it will probably end up being used by the kids anyway
Expat444 is offline  
post #8056 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 07:16 PM
Member
 
tigerninety's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello,

Thanks for this reply (and thanks to others who mentioned the same idea). One question, though: if I'm using my AE4000u's auto zoom adjust feature to switch between 16:9 and 2.35:1, my lens has to be within the frame of the screen, right?

And, if that's the case, won't my projector always be in the way of a reflected image?

(I'm hoping someone will tell me a way that the answer is "no".)

Thanks!

Tiger

Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

m. zillch nailed it down,

1st Surface Mirrors were used because of their higher degree of reflectivity, not because they prevent any "double-imaging".

Most all "plastic" or "Glass" "Rear Surface" Mirrors have at most 1/8" space between the rear "aluminum" coating and the outside front. However....a 1st Surface mirror does also add the slightest degree of Magnification due to the surface's proximity to the viewer. This alone is what accounts for a 1st Surface having approx 97% reflectivity, and a 2nd Surface having 94-95%

As the originator of Light Fusion, the use of 2nd Surface Mirrors coated with DIY Screen paint, I can attest that there is no 'double-imaging". For quite a while, a few tried to foster that off as being the case...but time...and hundreds of comments to the contrary by end users dispelled any doubts that such was not the case.

A 1/8" x 4' x 8' 2nd Surface Plastic Mirror averages about $119.00 at outlets such a Piedmont Plastics / Laird Plastics.

1st Surface? $375-400.00

tigerninety is offline  
post #8057 of 8536 Old 04-02-2012, 11:25 PM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat444 View Post

That's why we're going to try out the additional row using beanbag chairs as in reality it will probably end up being used by the kids anyway

My scientific studies have found that beanbag chairs are equal to pink unicorns and battle robots in awesomeness level amongst kids.
cybrsage is offline  
post #8058 of 8536 Old 04-03-2012, 07:59 AM
wnl
Senior Member
 
wnl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerninety View Post

Hello,

Thanks for this reply (and thanks to others who mentioned the same idea). One question, though: if I'm using my AE4000u's auto zoom adjust feature to switch between 16:9 and 2.35:1, my lens has to be within the frame of the screen, right?

Correct. But see below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerninety View Post

And, if that's the case, won't my projector always be in the way of a reflected image?

Well now that's an interesting question. Perhaps only the last mirror needs to be within the frame of the screen? I've never played around with using mirrors on the projected image but my intuition tells me that it should be possible to set up the reflections such that the lens itself does not need to be within the frame of the screen. This could be a fun experiment.
wnl is offline  
post #8059 of 8536 Old 04-03-2012, 09:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 281
The simplest way to understand mirror bounced projection, without having to download costly software or anything else, is to imagine a side view of a normal, let's say ceiling mounted projector scheme. I mean a screen hanging down one foot from the ceiling and then a pj 18 feet away, also hanging one foot down from the ceiling, exactly centered to the mid-line of the front of the screen, i.e. "on axis L to R" if viewed from the pj's perspective.

Now imagine a side view's projection path diagram. Pretend the triangular projection path was a piece of paper. If that top 18 foot span wont fit your room, you can fold the paper at a right angle downward, so the pj is shooting straight up toward the ceiling (assuming its ventilation/cooling scheme allows for this). The fold in the paper represents the size, angle, and position of the needed mirror.


You can add additional mirror bounces by adding additional folds to this piece of paper, however as far as I can tell, with the limitation that the pj in a normal setup must be within the same height area as the screen for the auto zooming to work properly, so too must the mirror bounce which occurs just before striking the screen, i.e. the last bounce if there are multiple ones.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #8060 of 8536 Old 04-04-2012, 09:13 PM
Senior Member
 
Expat444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bay Area CA
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Expat444 View Post


I sit 14.5' from a 153" screen and am still debating adding a closer row of seats

I tried out a front row at 9.5', it might not be to everyone's tastes but I liked it!
Expat444 is offline  
post #8061 of 8536 Old 04-06-2012, 08:50 PM
Member
 
trimule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lake Tahoe
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Pleasant surprise today - came home and found UPS had delivered a Bluray copy of Avatar. I purchased my 4000 on Jan. 04, 2012 and had totally forgotten about the Avatar bonus. Since I just got the PJ mounted this week (health issue - awful to just stare at that brown box for 3 months) I'll have a better than average viewing week. BTW - this thing is so good right out of the box that I may not bother with that mind numbing calibration routine. Now if I get a good price for my trusty AX200 on my eBay sale, it will be a GREAT week.

"There is a thing here I do not understand and it hurts my head to think about it"
Burns Red In The Sun - LITTLE BIG MAN
trimule is offline  
post #8062 of 8536 Old 04-08-2012, 10:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
vid53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: aurora ill
Posts: 664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
a red warning is blinking that i have 1800 hours on my lamp. Do i have to change it? It looks fine and not dark at all.
vid53 is offline  
post #8063 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 09:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 281
You are getting close to the point where it will automatically shut down after a few minutes of use (~2000 minute mark ?) when you will have no other option but to replace the bulb. I don't think there is any real danger in continuing to use it until then, but now is a good time to start looking for a new bulb.
Bulbs must eventually be replaced not just due to dimming but also because they are likely to pop as they age, just like a normal house lighbulb, and the explosion potentially can be much more serious and damaging to the pj when they do.

Be sure to buy a genuine Panasonic brand ET-LAE4000 only, not an "equivalent". They are around $350, maybe a little less if you are lucky, but anyone selling "it" for less than $300 I would be suspicious of sneaking in a "clone" version which may have improper color balance, dimmer output, and shorter life span than the real deal Panasonic lamp.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #8064 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 03:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
frank1940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid53 View Post

a red warning is blinking that i have 1800 hours on my lamp. Do i have to change it? It looks fine and not dark at all.

You can do pretty much as you want. (You will probably want to reset the lamp hours if you decide to continue to use the lamp until it fails.)

What I did when I had about the same amount of hours on the lamp as you do now was to buy a new lamp. Since new lamps are warrantied for only three months, I put it in the projector immediately. I put the old lamp into the box and put it away. (The new lamp was considerably brighter when I first installed it. I suspect that it has now lost most of the 'new lamp' brightness...) Now, I have a spare which will allow me to decide when I get to the 1800+ hour point whether I want to continue using this current lamp until it fails or get another new lamp. The old lamp is serving as my 'spare' lamp so I have a minimum of down time should the current lamp fail.
frank1940 is offline  
post #8065 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 04:36 PM
Senior Member
 
TVAddikt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So I have a question about setting up this projector for the initial setup. I am remodeling a room and to the point of setting this projector. I am hanging it on the ceiling. Mu screen is a DIY SeymourAV AT screen. I built a 2.35:1 screen. This is my thoughts towards setup (please let me know if I am correct in my thinking.
1. I turned it on and started messing with the settings in the main menu.
2. I need line up the 16:9 picture first. Once I get this tp display properly on the screen. Save the set 16:9 in my lens memory setting.
3. Play a 2:35:1 movie. Get it properly zoomed into fit on my screen. Save this to the lens memory setting.
4. When setting up for 2:35:1 from 16:9 I should not have to adjust vertically or horizontally or something is not right, correct?

This is my first projector that I am setting up. I really appreciate any inout that is provided.

Thanks
TVAddikt is online now  
post #8066 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 04:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Look at this http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post17510238

It helped me when I set mine up.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #8067 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 09:31 PM
Member
 
deromax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lac-a-la-tortue, PQ, Canada
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Point 4 : You WILL have to adjust the image vertically using the menu, not using the real knob on the projector.
deromax is offline  
post #8068 of 8536 Old 04-09-2012, 09:53 PM
wnl
Senior Member
 
wnl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVAddikt View Post

1. I turned it on and started messing with the settings in the main menu.
2. I need line up the 16:9 picture first. Once I get this to display properly on the screen. Save the set 16:9 in my lens memory setting.
3. Play a 2:35:1 movie. Get it properly zoomed into fit on my screen. Save this to the lens memory setting.

That is the basic procedure. You will not be able to center the image horizontally until you get to step 3. You may have to use electronic image shift (V-AREA POSITION from the LENS menu) to get the 2.35:1 image to line up vertically. This setting is saved in memory along with zoom and focus.

Caveat: the projector lens must be as low as the top of the screen in order for this technique to work! Otherwise when you zoom in from the 16:9 setting the projected area will shift off the screen and no amount of electronic shift will be able to fix it.

Quote:


4. When setting up for 2:35:1 from 16:9 I should not have to adjust vertically or horizontally or something is not right, correct?

Once you have the adjustments saved in memory, you should be able to switch between the two memory settings without touching the projector. Provided you paid heed to the caveat above.
wnl is offline  
post #8069 of 8536 Old 04-10-2012, 08:44 AM
Senior Member
 
TVAddikt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the info. I can find true 2:35:1 material and I seem to be able to properly zoom etc for 2:35:1. 16:9 seems to be a little more of a challenge. I think the problem I have is finding something that is true 16:9, so I can set the image.

I did have 16:9 and 2:35:1 set and everything seemed fine but then I played a movie that is suppose to be 1:85:1 (Avatar and Bad Teacher) and I don't see anything different between the 16:9 to the 1:85:1.

So to get the 2:35:1 image/movie I used a PS3 and the movie The Three Musketeers. Then I started using my sagetv hd200 to get the 16:9 but I am thinking the hd200 has to many factors in relation to screen size to be reliable enough to use.

So I think I want to use the PS3 to accomplish all formats. I am having trouble finding a 16:9 movie. Any suggestions? I have DVD's and blurays. I will even go and buy the suggested movie if necessary. All bluray's I have seen seem to being produced in 2:35-2:40.
When watching a 16:9 format and I play a movie that is 1:85, what difference should I be seeing on the screen (black bars)?

Thanks for all the help
TVAddikt is online now  
post #8070 of 8536 Old 04-10-2012, 09:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
frank1940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVAddikt View Post


I did have 16:9 and 2:35:1 set and everything seemed fine but then I played a movie that is suppose to be 1:85:1 (Avatar and Bad Teacher) and I don't see anything different between the 16:9 to the 1:85:1.

Be careful! 16:9 is approximately 1.78:1 and I have a feeling that many 1.85:1 movies are actually cropped to 16:9. This prevents the image from having very small bars at the top and bottom. If you are looking for a true 16:9 source material, use an HDTV signal or one of the Calibration Disks--- Spears & Munsil or Digital Video Essentials. If you are looking for true 1.85:1 material, you will have to go through your collection of Blu-ray's and DVD's until you find one that has small black bars at the top and bottom. You will have to look carefully as these black bars are only about 21 pixels high.

I have settings for my projector for 2.35:1, 1.85:1 and 16:9. I generally use the 1.85:1 setting for 16:9 material (ie TV broadcasts) as the image is a bit larger without losing much of the actual show content. (Broadcasters deliberately use a 'safe-area' mask when 'framing' their picture to prevent important image content from being lost as most flatpanel TV's use overscanning as their default setup. )
frank1940 is offline  
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

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