or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Rear Projection Units › Official LaserVue Owners thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official LaserVue Owners thread - Page 8

post #211 of 2625
Jeff,

Can you post the spectrum with the i1 and with your PR-670 so we can see the effects of the lower resolution?
post #212 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcaillo View Post

Jeff,

Can you post the spectrum with the i1 and with your PR-670 so we can see the effects of the lower resolution?

I do not have that at this point, but the difference is large. This can be replicated with a laser pointer and an i1. A laser is a single frequency.
post #213 of 2625
You don't save the data from your measurements? Are you using your own software or something else these days?
post #214 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcaillo View Post

You don't save the data from your measurements? Are you using your own software or something else these days?

I do use my own software, but I do not save the PR-670 spectrum on my PC. I just look at it on the display for the device if I need to check it at the time.
post #215 of 2625
That is unfortunate. Having a comparison of the spectral data from the two units would be very informative.
post #216 of 2625
Any Word on the 73" yet, when? Price?
post #217 of 2625
Does anyone hear ANYTHING about this technology?? Are they actually selling any??
post #218 of 2625
They still don't have enough to get them to all the dealers that want them.
post #219 of 2625
Although I am not a LaserView owner, I was present at a regional product introduction meeting for dealers prior to its release. At the unveiling, the vast majority of those attending noticed this defect and referred to it as a 'darkfield hotspot'. The Laserview does not utilize a large flat plane mirror to project its image on the screen. The design uses a centrally located parabolic mirror at the bottom of the screen. The parabolic mirror solution was needed to reduce the depth of the cabinet. This causes the 'glowlight'. Production may have been halted because there were difficulties in laser production, but the new product release scheduled for summer 2009 is rumored to have a totally redesigned parabolic mirror. This is the reason for the glow. The photo posted previously by a forum member/ owner looks the same as the TV at the unveiling.
Inquiries will validate this as the logical explanation.
post #220 of 2625
I've read about concerns of laser liabilities with front projection. Any thoughts on possibly using a very high gain screen to allow the actual beams to be utilized with reduced intensity? I'm willing to wait for laser front projection, seeing what it is capable of, as many other front projection fans. No mirror. No plastic screens.
post #221 of 2625
This is a repost from a separate thread.
I should have posted it here in the first place.
This clearly illustrates the failings of the LaserVue.
EJKrew got it mostly right. The parabolic mirror however is not responsible for the glowlight hot spot. It is rather the poorly designed lens cap and the failure to black out all interior objects in the cabinet which causes ambient lighting to light up the bottom of the cabinet. The hot spot is centered because that is where the lens is aimed and that is where the primary light is leaking around the first flat reflective mirror.

Also, there are no lasers shooting around inside the cabinet, or firing from the lens. There is a picture projected from the lens just like any projector. Place a sheet a paper in front of the lens and you see the picture. I have no idea how the picture goes from being laser created to an output light source.

Poorly designed light filter cap degrades LaserVue picture
If you are considering purchasing a Laservue now that they are back in production, you may want to run this test first. Assuming the most expensive TV is being exhibited in an isolated room in the store; close the door and turn off the lights.

Turn off the DVD or DirecTV device and view the LaserVue without a signal source.

The screen will glow with light from the engine below.

Now decide if you can live with it, because that light is always there and it will interfere with dark scenes, especially dark scenes at the bottom center of the screen.

Why is this happening?
There is plastic lens cap that encloses the lens at the bottom of the television. The lens aims the picture at a small rectangular mirror (mirror #1) which then reflects the image on to the crazy shaped parabolic mirror (mirror #2) which then reflects the image on to the big screen.



The lens cap is designed to prevent excess light from escaping from the lens and filling the interior of the cabinet.

Unfortunately, it does not work.





There is a fine line between the image edge and excess light which slips past mirror #1 and hits the front wall of the cabinet. The cap opening is about 1/16" to 3/32" to big on all sides. Furthermore some of the hardware inside the cabinet has not been blacked out. Shiny metal reflects the light adding to the ambient light inside the cabinet.



The problem can be fixed to some extent.
Using black electrical tape, I successfully stopped light from hitting the front of the cabinet. Thus the only ambient light being generated was from the lens itself and mirror #2. The picture quality greatly improved so much so that the ambient light was not distracting.
The downside is that the tape has to be so carefully located so as to not create a dark area on the screen or effect the picture in other unpleasant ways. I have not as yet been able to locate the tape appropriately or come up with a better solution for shrinking down the size of the opening. As you can see in the photo, the cap has curved surfaces. I can only see molding my own cap from scratch as a solution.

The included pictures should fully illustrate what I have explained. I find it very unfortunate that Mitsubishi has chosen to accept the results of a poorly designed $.50 cent plastic cap which clearly degrades an otherwise stellar picture.
post #222 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by $.02 View Post

I've read about concerns of laser liabilities with front projection. Any thoughts on possibly using a very high gain screen to allow the actual beams to be utilized with reduced intensity? I'm willing to wait for laser front projection, seeing what it is capable of, as many other front projection fans. No mirror. No plastic screens.

Personally I can't see any reason why a laser-lit front projector should be any more dangerous to the eyes than one with a regular mercury-vapor lamp. Lasers are dangerous because the beams are coherent i.e. they do not spread. But after reflecting off the surface of the DLP chip and passing through a lens the light loses its coherence. It just becomes light. No one is supposed to look right into a FP from too close up, but that's not unique to a laser unit.

It seems to that laser power is a perfect fit for FPs, offering good light quality, fast starting and freedom from regular and very expensive lamp replacements.
post #223 of 2625
Actually, the light remains coherent until it is diffused by the screen. The reason that it is more dangerous than a lamp is that there is more energy concentrated in a smaller area. It is true that the total energy is not that much greater, but you could have a stray coherent beam reflected off of something that could fry an eye. I am not sure that the risk is really that serious, but potential risks will likely keep vendors on hold until the technology is refined and applications are tested very thoroughly. There is also the issue of regulation on various classes of lasers.
post #224 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcaillo View Post

Actually, the light remains coherent until it is diffused by the screen. ...

My understanding of the meaning of "coherence" is that it does not spread. But to cover the entire area of the screen the light beam must spread. If it didn't all the light would be concentrated in one tiny spot in the center of the screen. Perhaps this is simply a confusion of terminology.
post #225 of 2625
Coherence means that it is all moving in the same direction. Degree of coherence is relative. It is as virtually as coherent as it hits the screen as it is at the DLP. That is why it has virtually infinite depth of field and focus is not a significant issue. This allows for the radical geometry to get the depth of the set so slim.

According to the service training, the laser is still dangerous at the back of the screen and the set should not be opened to that level except at the factory. My understanding is that they had to have that policy in order to meet regulatory standards for laser devices.

As I said, the risk may be overstated, or it may not, but considering the cost of a mistake (irreparable damage to vision), it seems prudent to be cautious.
post #226 of 2625
Concerning my previous question concerning light intensity, could someone formulate how much less intense a front projected laser would need be in proportion to the amount of the screen's gain rating? In other words, would a screen gain of 2.5 allow the laser to be appreciably any less potentially dangerous, directly to the retina, compared to a screen gain of 1?

Good advise - Don't stare into the sun. Pass it on.
post #227 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by $.02 View Post

Concerning my previous question concerning light intensity, could someone formulate how much less intense a front projected laser would need be in proportion to the amount of the screen's gain rating? In other words, would a screen gain of 2.5 allow the laser to be appreciably any less potentially dangerous, directly to the retina, compared to a screen gain of 1?

Good advise - Don't stare into the sun. Pass it on.

Not to derail the thread, but a low lumen laser scanning projector should be available to purchase next month. I am planning on pairing it with a dalite high-power (high gain screen) just as you mention above. Raster scanning the image also allows increased laser output while remaining safer to the eyes. I suppose if you wanted you could also install the Microvision projector into a rear projection tv as well.

http://www.microvision.com/
post #228 of 2625
Resolution: WVGA (848 x 480), not enough for us HD watchers.
post #229 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill View Post

Resolution: WVGA (848 x 480), not enough for us HD watchers.

It all depends on screen size and seating distance.
post #230 of 2625
I have to disagree. Someone used to HD is not going back to SD. Let me know when they have a 1920x1080 model.
post #231 of 2625
If 1920x1080 is high-res PC output, I agree with Bill. Certainly would love to have very high res HTPC attached to the display.
post #232 of 2625
I really really want one of these LaserVue sets. Problem is when I went to the show room and witnessed the Laservue for myself it was all a let down. The picture was High Def but it looked like how SD looks on HD with the pixellation. But it was like jumbo Pixels and that is what I figure to be the Sparkle/Speckle Effect.

It completely made this expensive TV unwatchable and I got a head ache trying to ingnore the spots. I mean these pixels were jumbo and fluxuating on the screen like million of little ants moving around and jiggling.

I talked to the sells guy and he said. "Ah this set just needs to be calibrated".

I hope he is right. Now I have tried to study this Laservue since day one. I have seen the Kuro comparisons and pics. Hands down yes, the Laservue is by far superior.

Then why was the in person experience different from the pictures?

I also read that some of the original Laservues had issues with something and had to post pone stock releases. No reason of why the sets were held back other than manufacturing parts were short.

So then the sets should still have the sparkle/Speckle Effect?

What to do, what to do? I want the new Laservue for the best picture and best detail. But from what I seen that Sparkle/Speckles all over the screen effect really turned me away.

What's the idea with this tv? It's the best picture at 25 feet away so you can't see the speckles?

The pictures I seen compared to the Kuro didn't display speckles or anything that I seen in the store model?

So what's up? Is the Speckles fixed or fixable? Are these sets meant to look horrible like this?

Does calibration remove this horrible ants like pixel movement?
post #233 of 2625
I would say that you were looking at a crummy picture supplied by cable TV. Try looking at the set again with some test DVD's or Blu-ray discs. Make sure that the set is connected to HDMI from the DVD player. I own a Kuro now and have been very happy. I miss the 65" screen and the lower electric bills, but the laservue failed for reasons I have already described.
post #234 of 2625
The anty like dot crawl picture distortion wasn't due to cable or input. Reason I know this is because they were using a blue ray on one imput and that blue ray's picture was totally dotty and un watchable and I tested another imput with my PSP. The PSP with a PSP game and a PS1 game both looked the same as the blue ray.

I mean they all had the dot crawl/speckle/sparckle pixellation all over the screen.

Totally got me downed and out about wanting to buy the Laser Vue.

I don't believe that fixing the color and brightness with a 400 dollar calibration will fix the pixels and anty like dot crawl/speckels that were contaminating the screens picture.

Am I the only one that has noticed such jumbo speckles in the forum? Because me and 3 other people at the show room agreed that the tv had major distortion due to the speckles.


Anyone on here without calibrated sets had the speckle issue?

And anyone on here with calibration noticed speckles?

Or has anyone else on here seen what I am talking about? If so what can be done to fix that picture distortion?
post #235 of 2625
Hey all, I'm Mr.Ecool and I must scratch my last statements on the Laservue having pixellation and antylike distortion and speckels.

Like most HDTV's, pixellation and such grain can be caused by high sharpness and high contrast and the tv being set in Brilliant Mode. The better the tv the bigger and better the pixellation I suppose.

I wasn't able to fool with the controls and out of box controls are all wacked out for floor modles.

So in retrospect, I must say that the Laser Vue was the most colorful and beutiful tv I ever seen. I bet that the speckles/Sparkle/Dot Crawl-Ant like pixellation could have been avoided had I just turned down the contrast, turned down the sharpness, and put color temp on low and put the sets color pallet in Natural instead of what I think it was Brilliant.

Sorry. I will make a better judgement next time after I fool around with the controls. I still want a Laservue if the pixel problem can be avoided. I will check on a different Laser Vue Floor model and work it's user controls because I'm too embarrassed to go back to the original place.

Sorry. Go Laser Vue Go.
post #236 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrecool View Post

Hey all, I'm Mr.Ecool and I must scratch my last statements on the Laservue having pixellation and antylike distortion and speckels....

You can edit or delete the comment(s)/post that you say you want to "scratch" - i.e., you don't have to leave it the way you wrote it, and you can delete the entire post if you don't like any of it.
post #237 of 2625
I happened to checkout a local A/V shop yesterday as I was looking for options larger than the Panny 65ā€ V10. They sell Mitsubishis and I gotta say the new sets look awesome. Speaking with a salesguy, he mentioned that Mits was continuing with the Laservue and will have ~75ā€ unit suitable for wall mounting come next spring, and in the $4500 range. Iā€™m intrigued? Anything from CEDIA about this?

I'm also wondering why people expect a major difference with the Laservue over the standard models. It's just a different light source.
post #238 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVRat View Post

Speaking with a salesguy, he mentioned that Mits was continuing with the Laservue and will have ~75 unit suitable for wall mounting come next spring, and in the $4500 range. I'm intrigued? Anything from CEDIA about this?

$4500 for a 75" set - that sounds like a price where these would probably sell well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVRat View Post

I'm also wondering why people expect a major difference with the Laservue over the standard models. It's just a different light source.

It's not just a different light source - it's a laser!!!!
post #239 of 2625
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVRat View Post

I happened to checkout a local A/V shop yesterday as I was looking for options larger than the Panny 65 V10. They sell Mitsubishis and I gotta say the new sets look awesome. Speaking with a salesguy, he mentioned that Mits was continuing with the Laservue and will have ~75 unit suitable for wall mounting come next spring, and in the $4500 range. I'm intrigued? Anything from CEDIA about this?

If true - this may be the year that I finally look into upgrading my old WS-65907 CRT RPTV

Quote:
Originally Posted by AVRat View Post

I'm also wondering why people expect a major difference with the Laservue over the standard models. It's just a different light source.

Laser (even LED) as the light source has many benefits over what would find in a conventional bulb based DLP television.
  • Ultra low energy consumption
  • Brighter picture
  • A light source that will not dim, and lasts the life of the television
  • Faster start-up time (due to no color wheel)
  • Fewer moving parts
  • Reduction/elimination of RBE (Rainbow Effect)
  • Capacity for more accurate / vibrant colors (a benefit of much discussion on this forum)
I see LaserVue as the only current choice for those seeking screens over 60" in size. No they aren't as thing as LCD or Plasma sets, but those of us who want a 'practical' (do not have complete light control, or a dedicated room for a Front Projector) larger viewing experience, laser based DLP televisions hold the potential to satisfy our needs.

LED based LCD is really coming on strong, however the sizes seem to top off at between 50-60", and the price increases exponentially as the size increases. OLED is certainly a technology with potential, but the manufacturing processes have not been refined to the point of lowering costs to the point that the average consumer can afford it.

I have not personally had the chance to view a LaserVue up close, but if Mitsubishi can mitigate the reported "speckle effect", and bring the prices down to a point that is affordable to a wider range of demographics, this technology could really take off.
post #240 of 2625
Wow. LV, love it or hate it! What to think.

I've been lurking for awhile but need to make a decision soon so here is the background to the bottom line question. 15 years ago I bought a Pioneer Elite RP after reading a review that concluded: "If you can afford this TV, buy it!" I never regretted buying it in spite of the insane price.

Now I need a 55-65 inch set for a room with a lot of uncontrollable ambient light. Still, I want the best picture I can get for these conditions. That is why the LV is on the top of my list. Plasmas and the Samsung LCD's are so reflective I can't imagine I would be happy. The Sony LCD's have a more muted reflectivity, so they are a possibility. Any other suggestions?

Till now I have never seen a DLP that I really liked. I will see a LV at a store tomorrow but I am never satisfied with an in-store demo, especially since the salesman will probably know little but won't admit it.

I would think (hope) that most of the new technology gremlins would be solved by now, but boy is solid information hard to come by. This forum is the best I've found so far, but it sometimes is hard to sort out those with real knowledge from those who seem to have some other agenda.

So, to the LV owners and techies who have had their hands on one, here is the question: If I can afford it, should I buy it?

Thx in advance.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rear Projection Units
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Rear Projection Units › Official LaserVue Owners thread