Official Mitsubishi hc4000 ONLY Thread - Page 58 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1711 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 01:11 PM
Newbie
 
gatorboy64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

Or just use the deafults low lamp, ciniema gamma, BC off....the mits is really close out of the box wit those settings..download the test disc referenced in #3 and set the contrast and brightness and for most folks they will be happy with the picture...if you want to go further, do steps 1 and 2....

Thanks for the info. I will first try just step 3. For the contrast and brightness, do I just set it to certain value or just by how I like it via sight?

Oh is the war eagle for Auburn? Yea... thanks for last Saturday night ..LOL
gatorboy64 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1712 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 01:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fleaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboy64 View Post

Thanks for the info. I will first try just step 3. For the contrast and brightness, do I just set it to certain value or just by how I like it via sight?

You set it by sight with a calibration disc running a test screen.

Bright/contrast can adjusted via the THX optimizer usually found on pixar discs, etc. Or another trick is to put a 2.35 movie in, then walk up to the screen and increase brightness until you start to see image noise (dithering) in the black bar area, then back off the brightness until ALL the image noise goes away. For contrast leave it at default until you can play a test screen from a calibration disc, THX Optimizer, etc.
fleaman is offline  
post #1713 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 01:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,986
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 147
To clarify to Gator, you need to burn the AVS disc or get a Disney WOW disc or Spears & Muncil.

The first 3 patterns on this page explain what you have to do in general, but the exact patterns will vary between discs:
http://www.spearsandmunsil.com/artic...epatterns.html


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #1714 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 02:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
bishopt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake St. Louis
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboy64 View Post

Thanks for the info. I will first try just step 3. For the contrast and brightness, do I just set it to certain value or just by how I like it via sight?

Oh is the war eagle for Auburn? Yea... thanks for last Saturday night ..LOL

Yeah auburn alum...that was brutal....major rebuilding year for us...lots of underclassman...most folks don't know this but there are only 2 folks that played last year from that team...and you guys have had some major injuries...it wasn't pretty...thats for sure...

...now back to the mits HC4000...


Both Fleaman and Coder covered some options both are valid...

War Eagle!!!
bishopt is offline  
post #1715 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 03:06 PM
Newbie
 
gatorboy64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

It wasn't easy for me to find the post either, so here you go...

The projector has a red-shift at first, it will wear off as the lamp ages. The calibration is already very close out-of-the-box, but you can get it a little tighter as below:

1) You need a $120 colorimeter, or if you want to spend more you can buy a more expensive $300+ certified colorimeter. The cheaper one is called an X-Rite Eye-One Display LT, you can buy them on amazon.
2) You use HCFR software, google "hcfr download", it's free.
3) You can download the AVS test disc and burn it, it's free, I hope the below is the most updated link.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=948496

4) Once you've done all that, you use the calibration for dummies guide like the person did in the below post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post20223945

Others can elaborate more for you on Contrast/Brightness settings and what not if they wish.


Is this a step 1 -4 needing to do all? I am asking because it looks like the HCFR, AVS test disk, and the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics [Blu-ray] all do the same thing. Or are they all different and each one needs to be run? I am going to buy the X-Rite Eye-One Display LT, but do I need to do all 4 steps one after another or just use the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics [Blu-ray]
gatorboy64 is offline  
post #1716 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 03:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
bishopt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake St. Louis
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboy64 View Post

Is this a step 1 -4 needing to do all? I am asking because it looks like the HCFR, AVS test disk, and the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics [Blu-ray] all do the same thing. Or are they all different and each one needs to be run? I am going to buy the X-Rite Eye-One Display LT, but do I need to do all 4 steps one after another or just use the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics [Blu-ray]

read my reply...no it depends on how detail you want to go...just for a starting point, do step 3..

then based on what Fleaman said, set your settings like he mentioned and use the test disc to set your contrast and brightness...

gamma=cinema
lamp=low
BC=off

then set your contrast and brightness with the test patterns...should get you close and look good.

War Eagle!!!
bishopt is offline  
post #1717 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 04:26 PM
Newbie
 
gatorboy64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

read my reply...no it depends on how detail you want to go...just for a starting point, do step 3..

then based on what Fleaman said, set your settings like he mentioned and use the test disc to set your contrast and brightness...

gamma=cinema
lamp=low
BC=off

then set your contrast and brightness with the test patterns...should get you close and look good.


I just bought the HC4000 on line. AVS was out of stock on them, so I called and they said they will not be getting any more in. I had to get if from another site. I also bought the Disney WOW calibration program. I know you said out of the box the projector is just about set, but I also have an HDTV that I need to calibrate. It was only $24 so I thought I would try it before I spend $100 on the X-Rite Eye-One. Has anyone had any experience with this WOW program? Is it any good?
gatorboy64 is offline  
post #1718 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 06:41 PM
Member
 
vullcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The WOW program is very good for the price you pay. My image looks a lot better after using it. I think having your device professionally ISF calibrated or using an x-rite would give you more piece of mind knowing you were perfectly calibrated rather than actual "wow this looks a lot better, sure am glad I paid a few hundred dollars for this" feeling.


If for nothing else, keep in mind with this disc you are tuning your display to what looks best to your eyes, and someone else who perfectly calibrates your display might have it tuned to the standard, but the standard might not be what looks best to you.
vullcan is offline  
post #1719 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 08:13 PM
Member
 
intoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorboy64 View Post

I just bought the HC4000 on line. AVS was out of stock on them, so I called and they said they will not be getting any more in. I had to get if from another site.

That sucks I was planning to order mine from avs next month. I noticed amazon is out of stock now as well. Surely its not being discontinued.
intoran is online now  
post #1720 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 09:18 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,986
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 147
I think overstock.com still has some in stock. They must have overstocked, go figure!


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #1721 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 09:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fleaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by intoran View Post

Surely its not being discontinued.

That would leave a serious hole in their DLP line up if so.....
fleaman is offline  
post #1722 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 10:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,986
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 147
It is weird provantage.com is also out of stock, maybe they are just behind in order refills.


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #1723 of 2860 Old 10-20-2011, 11:48 PM
Member
 
contentedbloke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I’m happy to post my experience of using the HC4000 in a CIH setup. I learned a lot from these forums and this is my way of contributing back to the forum.

My projector is mounted exactly 13’-6” from the screen and is ceiling mounted, with the bottom of the projector at 95” from the floor. My screen is a 47” x 110.5” custom made 1.2 gain fixed frame screen with an aspect ratio of 2.35:1. The bottom of the screen (excluding 3” frame) is exactly 30” from the floor.

I first floor mounted the projector at 13’-6” to test the image size and configured the projector for the default 16:9 aspect ratio (under Menu -> Image -> Advanced Menu -> Screen Size -> 16:9). Then I used the zoom lens to arrive at the equivalent 16:9 “frame” for a 2.35 image. The way the Mitsubishi does CIH is different from other CIH-capable projectors like JVC or Panasonic AE40000. The Mitsubishi uses the “shrink method” to do a Constant Image Height.

First, I decided on the size of the 2.35 image I wanted. My HT room is 19’ x 14’ with my seating at 13’-6”. I simply placed the projector on the floor at this distance, connected my WDTV to it and started projecting a 2.35 movie on to a blank wall to decide the image size I wanted. For my room size, I felt that 47” x 110.5” (120” diagonal) would be a comfortable image size for a 2.35 aspect ratio movie. I could have gone with the larger and more standard 115” x 49” size, but this would mean that the width of the image would leave too little space for the front speakers to fit in at the sides (see my photos below – I don’t have an AT screen) and I couldn’t “take in” the entire image of that size at one glance.

All these calculations were performed while the projector was running in the standard 16:9 mode. Which means that the image being projected was actually 110.5” x 62” (127” diagonal) with black bars on top and bottom. So while calculating throw distance, mounting height and screen size by using either the projector central calculator or Mitsubishi HC4000 website calculator, I had to input the 16:9 size. To achieve a CIH image where the height of the image is restricted to 47” whatever be the aspect ratio, I had to go to Menu -> Image -> Advanced Menu -> Screen Size -> 2.35 (CinemaScope). Immediately, the projector cuts off the black bars on top and bottom and only the image of 110.5” x 47” is projected. The cool thing here is that we can digitally “shift” the 2.35 image within the larger 16:9 frame so that the extra 15” (i.e. 62" - 47") can be at the bottom or top of the screen. So, while the bottom of my original 16:9 image was just 15” from the floor , the 2.35 image was a comfortable 30” from the floor. This digital shift can be saved in one of three programmable memory slots (on the remote cum projector), along with other settings like screen size (2.35:1 or 16:9), gamma etc. Everytime the projector is switched on, it defaults to the last used memory setting. So if you last used a memory setting of 2.35 screen with a digitally shifted image, this is what will be the default everytime the projector switches on.

In order to view 16:9 content, all I had to do was press the Aspect button on the remote. When selecting 16:9 as the aspect ratio, the HC4000 resizes the image to fit the CIH height of 47”, make the width 83.6” (and therefore 96” diagonal). I can assure those who are contemplating a CIH setup that this scaling algorithm is superb and one can hardly detect that the image is being rescaled. All I need to do to move from one aspect ratio to another is hit the Aspect button. There is no need to change the zoom settings of the projector or shift its location etc. This is a simple and brilliant way of doing CIH.

I did notice a slight drop in brightness under this CIH setup, primarily on account of the huge size of the image (remember that the projector is actually projecting a 127” 16:9 image but with the top and bottom 7.5” cut off digitally). But another forum member told be to turn on Brilliant Color which gave me the sufficient brightness while still running on Low lamp mode and while keeping Gamma at Cinema mode. I know that ultimately I have to switch to “Standard” (i.e. high) lamp mode to boost the lumens as the lamp life ages but its about how much I can postpone it. I usually average about 700 hours a year, so even fully under standard lamp, it should last about 3.5-4 years.

I used the AVS709 calibration series to basically set the brightness and contrast. As reported by others on this forum, the Mits is superbly calibrated out of the box and nothing needs to be touched except the brightness and contrast. My primary video component was my HTPC running a ATI HD5850 under Windows 7 SP1 with XBMC. I had connected this to my Onkyo TX-SR605 receiver through HDMI and the AVR is connected to my projector using a Sabrent CAT5-HDMI balun which I bought from Amazon. This is because my house is prewired using 2” PVC conduits which are too small for the HDMI headers to fit into, much less turn at the bends in the wall and ceiling. So I had no choice but to run 30' of CAT5 wiring between the AVR and projector and used the balun to do the conversion to HDMI. It worked pretty well and I was able to push a 1080p@60Hz signal with no problem. The only glitch is that in Windows, under the ATI catalyst menu, I could only select the Ycbcr 4:2:2 color space under the Pixel Format category. Any other selection was not accepted by the Mits and resulted in severe noise or grains. I attribute this more to the limits of the HDMI extender rather than the projector or HTPC because when I tried connecting it earlier with a direct HDMI cable it worked perfectly. Also, when using the Black Clipping test of the AVS709, I realized that I was able to see all the bars on the test, which meant that I wasn’t seeing any “true black” but only shades of grey. See this post for more info on how I solved it.

In the end, I’m pretty happy with the way my projector and screen have turned out. The CIH setup is superb and its is the way movies have to be watched. The real beauty of CIH is that it “expands” when watching a 2.35 movie and “shrinks” back when watching 16:9 content, which is how movies are supposed to be. My earlier setup consisted of an Infocus IN72 480p projector with a 110” 16:9 manual pulldown screen. There is a HUGE difference after the upgrade on multiple counts – increase in resolution to 1080p, the amazing sharpness of the Mitsubishi HC4000, the 2.35 fixed frame screen and the colors and “pop” of the new image. I used to watch 110” TV shows and much smaller 2.35 movies. Now it’s the exact opposite, and I don’t consider the reduction in size in 16:9 content from 110” to 96” as very significant because of the overall setup and quality. Also considering that most of my 16:9 content is TV shows which aren’t that great in quality to begin with, a smaller image only improves the visual quality. Also, the latest version of XBMC which is about to release ("version "Eden") is supposed to be CIH friendly, meaning that it can automatically position subtitles with reference to the image bottom irrespective of aspect ratio, so I don't have to suffer not having subs when watching 2.35 content.

The images below show my HT and XBMC setup and a 16:9 scene from Sex And The City and another 2.35 scene from Clash Of The Titans. I had a lot of difficulty in taking the photos despite having a DSLR due to my limited photography knowledge and because the room is pitch black when lights are turned off (I cannot see my hand in front of me). Either the photos were under or over exposed and I did not have enough time to learn the correct settings as I wanted to get this post out. So attribute any shortcomings in the quality of pictures to the photographer rather than the projector or htpc. Any suggestions on taking photos are welcome!

I also want to thank all those who have helped me with the CIH concepts and Mitsubishi reviews and helped me make this setup possible. Specifically I want to thank coderguy, bishopt, cuttard, fleaman, cavx, joesyah, steven56, coolrda for their valuable inputs! I am also posting references to this in the CIH section so that it will help other potential CIH wannabes!
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
contentedbloke is offline  
post #1724 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 05:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lawdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Springfield, MO USA
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by contentedbloke View Post

First, I decided on the size of the 2.35 image I wanted. My HT room is 19’ x 14’ with my seating at 13’-6”.

Wow this review appeared at just the right time for me. I am trying to find a way I can cheaply upgrade my NEC 9PG extra CRT projector in my own CIH theater. My screen is 46" x 108", and as it turns out, my mounting position will be around 13' 6"

My concern is that my room is wider than it is long, and so that when seated my eyes are about 10' from the screen. Would you be able to comment on pixel structure visability at 10' in your setup? How close to the screen are you when you can make out the pixels, how close when it bothers you?

I also have a ceiling height of 92" and a fixed screen in place that is 16.5" inches down from the ceiling. I'll probably have to find the lowest profile mount I can (maybe make one) and then use a wee bit of tilt. But I'd like to avoid tilt if I can because I think it would be a detriment if/when I put an ISCO II in place.

Thanks for your very helpful review.
lawdawg is offline  
post #1725 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 06:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
bishopt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake St. Louis
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by contentedbloke View Post

I'm happy to post my experience of using the HC4000 in a CIH setup. I learned a lot from these forums and this is my way of contributing back to the forum.

Snip....

Congrats and glad everything worked out....

War Eagle!!!
bishopt is offline  
post #1726 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 06:12 AM
Advanced Member
 
bishopt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake St. Louis
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by intoran View Post

That sucks I was planning to order mine from avs next month. I noticed amazon is out of stock now as well. Surely its not being discontinued.

The place I recommend is a very small mom and pop shop, but great personal service...the Projector Place, I would give them a call and see if they have them in stock...I'd be surprised if they didn't. http://www.theprojectorplace.com/

War Eagle!!!
bishopt is offline  
post #1727 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 06:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
paradigm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: las vegas
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I need to be re-assured that I am reading the Mitsubishi calculator right.

My setup:

92" 16:9 screen
Projector ceiling mounted 10' from screen.
Mount I am buying is only 2.5" from the ceiling.

The offset is 15.2"
Ceiling is 8'

So the top of my screen would need to be 15.2 (offset) + 2.5 (mount) = 17.7"
This is how far down the top of the screen material would need to be?

I hope someone can chime in here and tell me if this is right or I am wrong.
Just need confirmation before pulling the trigger. I have never owned DLP and just can't believe its so hard to get things perfect.
paradigm is offline  
post #1728 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 10:25 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,986
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by paradigm View Post

So the top of my screen would need to be 15.2 (offset) + 2.5 (mount) = 17.7"
This is how far down the top of the screen material would need to be?

Almost perfect, except you have to add in Lens Center to Base distance, but this projector isn't very big so it doesn't make much difference. The lens center to base is just at 3" (just checked).

The calculation is:
Mounting Pole Length + Lens Center to Base + Offset


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #1729 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 11:12 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
I have a Mitsu HC4900 and wanted to upgrade. Do you think the HC4000 has significantly better black levels than the HC4900?
sog35 is offline  
post #1730 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 06:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
paradigm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: las vegas
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Almost perfect, except you have to add in Lens Center to Base distance, but this projector isn't very big so it doesn't make much difference. The lens center to base is just at 3" (just checked).

The calculation is:
Mounting Pole Length + Lens Center to Base + Offset

Coderguy - THANKS!
paradigm is offline  
post #1731 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

Hey Curttard...I'm thinking of switching my 16:9 and going to 2.35 but would not be able to move it around to adjust like you, is the brightness issue really noticeable...of course mine will not be as big as yours either..more like 120" diag for a 2.35 screen, not sure if that makes any difference...that and it would make my 16:9 screen smaller than it is now...since I'm pretty much as far back as I can go. Another question that I haven't seen much of an answer, what do you do for 1.87 shot films....not a huge difference, but I am curious...

Well, of course the brightness will be less because your actual projection size will be much bigger, regardless of the image itself being the same or even a bit smaller. Would you notice the difference in brightness between a 16:9 movie digitally shrunk to fit your 2.35 screen versus the same movie viewer native size on a 16:9 screen? Maybe. Definitely if you A/B'd them side by side somehow.

If you'd like I could take a lumen reading of, say, a pure white screen at 16:9 and the same pure white screen at shrunk 16:9 in 2.35 mode, so you could have an idea about the percentage drop-off. I also posted a comparison of an Apocalypto scene done like that way back in the thread (or maybe in the old thread). Both pics came out way darker than the image was in real life, but you can get an idea of the *difference* between the two.

edit: Here are the Apocalypto pics, I really messed up the exposure too badly to make them worth much.




curttard is offline  
post #1732 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 08:40 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,986
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 147
106" 16:9 should be the same brightness as 100" 2:35, at least that's how I calculated based on the fact that the it requires about a 106" diagonal area for a 16:9 lens to produce a 100" 2.35 image...

I could be wrong I suppose depending on other factors, but for now that's what I'm using for my basis.
Readings would be good as long as you have a light meter and not an eye-one.


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #1733 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 09:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fleaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 103
If the width is gonna be the same, 16:9 to 2.35, then the brightness is gonna be the same.

If you are going wider than your current 16:9 screen to 2.35, then your gonna lose brightness. How much depends on how much bigger you zoom to.

120" diagonal 2.35 is equivalent to a 126" diagonal 16:9 screen/brightness.
fleaman is offline  
post #1734 of 2860 Old 10-21-2011, 09:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

106" 16:9 should be the same brightness as 100" 2:35, at least that's how I calculated based on the fact that the it requires about a 106" diagonal area for a 16:9 lens to produce a 100" 2.35 image...

I could be wrong I suppose depending on other factors, but for now that's what I'm using for my basis.
Readings would be good as long as you have a light meter and not an eye-one.

Nope, just an EyeOneLT.

Brightness difference is fairly significant in my case because I went from 106" 16:9 to equivalent of 140" 16:9 (iirc) for my CIH.
curttard is offline  
post #1735 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 07:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
bishopt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake St. Louis
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by curttard View Post

Nope, just an EyeOneLT.

Brightness difference is fairly significant in my case because I went from 106" 16:9 to equivalent of 140" 16:9 (iirc) for my CIH.

Thanks...so how do you handle, 1.87 format movies...I know there are not a lot of those but was curious...

War Eagle!!!
bishopt is offline  
post #1736 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

Thanks...so how do you handle, 1.87 format movies...I know there are not a lot of those but was curious...

Anything under 2, I watch as 16:9. I don't think 1.87 would even be very noticeable. Do you know offhand some movies in that ratio?

Slightly more problematic are movies like the original Tron that are 2.2 (iirc). I just let those get the top and bottom cropped a bit.
curttard is offline  
post #1737 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 04:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WynsWrld98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by contentedbloke View Post

All these calculations were performed while the projector was running in the standard 16:9 mode. Which means that the image being projected was actually 110.5” x 62” (127” diagonal) with black bars on top and bottom. So while calculating throw distance, mounting height and screen size by using either the projector central calculator or Mitsubishi HC4000 website calculator, I had to input the 16:9 size. To achieve a CIH image where the height of the image is restricted to 47” whatever be the aspect ratio, I had to go to Menu -> Image -> Advanced Menu -> Screen Size -> 2.35 (CinemaScope). Immediately, the projector cuts off the black bars on top and bottom and only the image of 110.5” x 47” is projected. The cool thing here is that we can digitally “shift” the 2.35 image within the larger 16:9 frame so that the extra 15” (i.e. 62" - 47") can be at the bottom or top of the screen. So, while the bottom of my original 16:9 image was just 15” from the floor , the 2.35 image was a comfortable 30” from the floor.

I'm trying to figure out what my offset would be for a CIH setup. I have 8' ceilings so I'd need the digital downshift (digital vertical shift) feature for sure and then I'm not even sure if it's doable but that's what I'm trying to find out...

My situation is 2.35:1 ratio screen, top of screen 15" from ceiling (I could lower it some if needed but don't want to lower it much). 16:9 size 53" tall x 94" wide x 108" diagonal. 2.35:1 size 53" tall x 125" wide x 135" diagonal. So re: the 2.35:1 image for the lens offset calculator the 16:9 version of the 2.35:1 size is what should be used (70" tall x 125" wide x 143" diagonal)?

So when the Mitsubishi is setup for a 2.35:1 screen in the setup menu and the Aspect button is set to 2.35:1 the image really is displayed 53" tall x 125" wide with NO black bars projected above and below?? If this is true does this help direct lumens to the 2.35:1 image vs. if black bars were displayed above and below image?

So anyway I'm trying to figure out what the lens offset would be then it modified by using the digital vertical lens shift feature to see where the center of the lens must be in relation to top of screen.

Thanks!
WynsWrld98 is offline  
post #1738 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 07:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fleaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by WynsWrld98 View Post

My situation is 2.35:1 ratio screen, top of screen 15" from ceiling (I could lower it some if needed but don't want to lower it much). 16:9 size 53" tall x 94" wide x 108" diagonal. 2.35:1 size 53" tall x 125" wide x 135" diagonal. So re: the 2.35:1 image for the lens offset calculator the 16:9 version of the 2.35:1 size is what should be used (70" tall x 125" wide x 143" diagonal)?

Yeah, you would be looking at the offset of the 16:9 size that matches your width. So 125" wide 2.35 means your offset is what the 143" diagonal 16:9 size is. And that is assuming you shift the 2.35 image to the top of the 16:9 box.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WynsWrld98 View Post

So when the Mitsubishi is setup for a 2.35:1 screen in the setup menu and the Aspect button is set to 2.35:1 the image really is displayed 53" tall x 125" wide with NO black bars projected above and below?? If this is true does this help direct lumens to the 2.35:1 image vs. if black bars were displayed above and below image?

No, black bars ARE projected, but if you have a 2.35 screen with black masking, you shouldn't see it (and assuming there isn't a white wall beyond the masking.

So no, you will NOT get lumens from the unused part of the image directed to the 2.35 area. The only way to do that is with an anamorphic lens.

You have to figure the lumens from the 143" 16:9 size you're working off. And obviously you're really pushing it at that size. You might have to run in high lamp right off the beginning.
fleaman is offline  
post #1739 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 07:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WynsWrld98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

Yeah, you would be looking at the offset of the 16:9 size that matches your width. So 125" wide 2.35 means your offset is what the 143" diagonal 16:9 size is. And that is assuming you shift the 2.35 image to the top of the 16:9 box.



No, black bars ARE projected, but if you have a 2.35 screen with black masking, you shouldn't see it (and assuming there isn't a white wall beyond the masking.

So no, you will NOT get lumens from the unused part of the image directed to the 2.35 area. The only way to do that is with an anamorphic lens.

You have to figure the lumens from the 143" 16:9 size you're working off. And obviously you're really pushing it at that size. You might have to run in high lamp right off the beginning.

Thanks! Re: So 125" wide 2.35 means your offset is what the 143" diagonal 16:9 size is, how do I figure how much downshift I can use digitally to truly figure out what my offset is to see if this will work in my room?
WynsWrld98 is offline  
post #1740 of 2860 Old 10-22-2011, 08:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fleaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by WynsWrld98 View Post

Thanks! Re: So 125" wide 2.35 means your offset is what the 143" diagonal 16:9 size is, how do I figure how much downshift I can use digitally to truly figure out what my offset is to see if this will work in my room?

If 143" diagonal 16"9 is 125" wide, then yes.

When you say 'downshift', are you wanting to shift the 2.35 image down? 'cos most people here are trying to shift it up.

The furthest up you can shift your 2.35 is to the top of the 16:9 box (at the 143" diagonal size, if that's what you're doing, 125" wide). So the offset would be what the 16:9 143" diagonal size is, ASSUMING you shift the 2.35 image to the very top of the 16:9 box. If you don't, the offset increases from there.
fleaman is offline  
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Tags
Mitsubishi Hc4000 300 Inch 1080p Front Projector
Gear in this thread - Hc4000 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