Official 3D Projector Thread. - Page 2

It will be interesting to see if Panasonic and Epson release 3D projectors next fall - I personally think they will.

You guys need to do some basic reading on 3D display technolgies (there are many) and a little reading on the standard. This thread is already going off topic and starting to contain whether well meaning or not dribble. Opinions on how much basic 3D might cost yada, how long it will take for Joe Consumer to adopt it and at what price. info on how long source content might take for Joe, Please, please don`t bog down this thread with such stuff.

A good place to start learning about 3D display technology is the October 2009 issue of Wide Screen Review in an article written by expert Chris Chinnock.

Please understand the difference between whether a projector can accept say a 120HZ stream and its refresh rate of 120HZ or 240HZ. Completely different things. Please understand the difference between two projector solutions and one projector solutions (some one projector solutions uses dual light engines and act more like two projector solutions, with some differences). Right now any two projectors can be used to display 3D. No special projector is needed. You need to process the 3D source intol eft and right images and feed each to the corrrect projector. Then you need filters and passive glasses. If polarizers, you need a silver screen.


With single projector systems, you need shutter glasses or an active filter system in the projector which rapidly rotates the two filters between the light source and the display chip(s) and then you use passive glasses.

You don`t lose 50% of the light. You lose a lot more. There is a lot more going on re light loss than what the glasses eat up. Duh? What you say there boy. Yup.You will lose about 80% of the light, which means you will get about 20% of the light you would get in 2D. It depends on the technology and the glasses, but remember each eyes image is not continuous. Think of it as the image being there only 50% of the time (I am simplifying again). Two projectors start out with double the light and will always be brighter than one projector of the same lumens. Not brain science.But say you have a single projector of 2500lumens. In single projector 3D you would end up with about the equivalent brightness of a 500 ANSI projector in 2D. Not brain science either. It is confusing though particularly the delivery systen requirements and the various display technologies. There is not necessarily a break down between commercial theater technology and HT technology. However,commercial theaters have elected to use passive glasses.They are cheaper. However,two projector solutions are required OR a device to rotate the two filters rapidly between the light source and the display chips.

This thread should be what projectors can be used in single projector 3d systems since any and all projectors can be used for two projector systems. The basic requirement for a single projector to be 3D ready is being able to accept the stream containing the left and right eye images and a way to sync shutter glasses. simplifying again.Two light engine single projector systems would use passive glasses as will as any with active filter system in the projector.

I was just geting ready to buy a JVC HD950

Guess I should hold off fr the moment.

What is considered the best mid priced pj to use until I go 3D?

I am using a 120" Firehawk screen in a room with very little ambient light.

Remains to be seen. So far Sony keeps promising that the PS3 will deliver true stereo 1080p over HDMI 1.3 with the same quality as an HDMI 1.4 connector. I think it's too early to say conclusively what equipment needs to be replaced.


3D at the home should be better than the theater if your 2D theater image is better than the 2D image at the theater. With high-scan LCD glasses you get no crosstalk between left/right and no loss of brightness: that should actually make for a significantly better 3D image as long as your glasses/display are running at 120 or 240 Hz.


HDMI 1.4 is already a standard.

If by "acceptable standards" you really mean "improved display technologies" then sure, makes sense to wait if you'd like as better 3D display technology will emerge and get cheaper and cheaper. Also, 3D displays should make superior 2D images since in many cases image characteristics need to be more refined (especially for alternating left/right: latency issues with LCD response have to be minimized for example).


Hugh? I don't think that the guy who wants to watch the superbowl in 3D is as concerned with image perfection as we are. And since 3D is being added to many 120Hz + televisions for just a few hundred dollars over standard 2D prices, it's a "no brainer" to go with a 3D model for your new HDTV purchase just to cover your options.

Is there an intrinsic difference between the alternating frames 120Hz/shutter-glasses implementation in flat panels and FPJ's that would result in more light loss? 80% seems like something you would have seen very vocal complaints about coming out of CES's--particularly in respect to larger PDP's (60"+) that struggle to hit 50 or 60fL completely maxed out. Most just noted it's a little dimmer in passing, if they even mentioned it at all. I can't imagine how a 10 or 12fL image on a trade show floor with little to no light control could have been anything more than a complete joke.

Why would you lose more than 50% with active LCD shutter glasses which are only blocking light exactly 50% of the time? In fact, because one eye still has full light while the other eye has the black-out, the brain's perception of brightness does not drop by half... rather, the brain "trusts" the eye that's seeing full bright to forumlate it's internal perception of brightness for what's being watched. For instance, if you close one eye, your brain doesn't suddenly see the world 1/2 as brightly... it uses the open eye as the guide and ignores the eye that's only seeing black.

Now, if both eyes blacked out at the same time in on/off fashion, then the brain would see that as dimming... similar to the way DLP works by varying on/off of full-brightness light many times a second. But the left-right alternating of sequential 3D frames affects our perception differently. Some viewers with LCD shutter glasses don't see a noticable drop off in light.


No. In fact, as long as latency issues aren't a problem, alternating L/R front projection is nothing more than a normal front projector that happens to alternate every other image with content for the opposite eye... that's not even a physical difference, that's a signal-content difference.

david. This is not supposed to be a theoretical or practical discussion thread. It is to compile 3D ready single projectors. I am not going to contribute further to getting this thread off topic. Staret another thread on light losses from various 3D display technologies and I will answer your questions but just for a start LCD shutter glasses are not fully transmissive. Try reading the WSR article for a discussion of 3D light losses.

Mitsubishi recently announced an extremely bright (4500 ANSI) single dlp chi[ 1024 x 768 2 x3 fixed offset 3D projector for about $2500 with a street considerably lower. The XD600D 3D. If it had a 16 x9 aspect it would be a great solution for playing with 3D in ones HT while the dust settles.

Hi DA Vid Boulet:


I think I didnt get my point duely clear. we got reports from CES referrring to release of devices in 3D that are imcompatible with the preset blue ray players, hi def tv sets and certainly projectors. The reports said that many new receivers will be also imcompatible.

Picture the following situation: you just purchased a JVC projector (RS 25 or HD 950), a very good blue ray, a full hd tv set and a top receiver freshly released. How much did it all cost?


Now you just have to upgrade to a technology that is immersive, new, certainly expensive, and can take around at least two years (being optimistic to reach the ideal standard. I have read a lot about the subject and it seems that a lot of cons will affect a prompt acceptance of the technology.


Lots of people have already gone to expensive projectors, high def tvs, blue ray players, and if it's true that they are incompatible with 3D, what do you think they will do? As me, simply wait.


One great point to be considered yet is that going to a theater once in a while and use glasses is acceptable, but using them all the time in your home theater is quite different. I dare say a great majority of people will get away.


I'm not against 3D. Much to contrary I really wish it to be succesful, but after it gets mature enough. Definitely it is not. I'm not showing my point of view, but most experts point of view.


Early adoption can cause waste of money and deception. Since I'll be doing well with my RS 25 that's about to come, my sony bravia hi def, my new Denon receiver, certainly I won't dispose of them just to have 3D, If I have to pay this price.


I will wait, as millions will do, and whatch what happens in the next years.


As someone said in this thread, posts as this can be placed elsewhere. I see many are discussing about possible technical aspects of 3d sources to come and I don't want to spoil the party, its really unfair.

I would assume if Mark thinks that my post regarding reduced brightess for 3D images isn't germane to this thread... the certainly your post is not.

There are plenty of threads littered with all the points you just made. Let's keep this one related to the question of 3D projector selections. Blog-style free-thinking/opinion posts about the pros and cons of 3D or its implimentation have plenty of threads with hours of discussion already having exhausted every point you just made several times over.

dave

I'm with you, waltie.

Most 3D projection early adopter come from PC gaming with Nvision3D from nvidia. Acer 720p 3D projector seems to be getting rave review on zero ghosting compare to current 22" LCD 3D monitor. Personally, I prefer LCD shutterglass to polarizer as I still feel that polarizer do leak some color.

FYI:

Tom Norton reports from CES on the LG CF3D FP ($10,000, avail. late spring), which uses SXRD (!) chips in two separate light paths:

http://blog.hometheatermag.com/ces2010/010910LG3DPJ/

Yes, this is the only one that I have been able to find that would satisfy my requirements, but $10K is in a different life. For me the $2-3K range is the sweet-spot.

Wait for active -style front projection.

The problem with "constant on" left/right projectors is that you've basically got two projectors in one... double the chipsets and light-engines, and probably double the optics for the most part. So the cost will always be higher given the added physical elements.

active 3D systems are basically standard 2D systems that scan fast enough so that the image being displayed can simply alternate left/right/left/right... but it's one physical image display system (not dual). There still may be a premium over 2D prices because you need high quality elements with a very fast response time to allow you to discretely change images back/forth 60 or 120 times a second... so latency issues with LCOS or LCD that don't really intrude into a single mono-image might be a problem for 3D. DLP would be very well suited given its instant on/off, but single-chip 3D DLP units would double the dithering and RBE issues since you now have to drive two signals in the time space of one. LED lit DLP might fix that to a degree since LED can reduce RBE. What may be a perfect compromise might be dual-DLP light engine 3D machines... they'd cost more than 2D machines, but might be a good balance of price versus performance. You could also double up the light path for double-bright 2D display if needed.

You are in the wrong forum.

The LG machine uses two light engines through one primary lens and is more akin to two seperate projectors. It most likely has a polarizer filter between each engine and the primary lens and requires polarizer glasses and a silver screen.

Let`s try and keep this thread to presenting 3D projecto roptions and the characterics or specifications of each machine .Filters, what type, no filters, type of screen required etc. What can I buy. What else do I need for the machine I buy.

How is what David said not consistent with this?

Here's what I don't understand - 3D is going to be a shifting landscape probably for the next two years, especially in the front projection area, so why spend a ton of money now on it when you're going to be left far behind in 18 months? The Optoma HD 66 (I think) is only $699 (not counting the shutter glasses) and should still be worth something when you're finished with it and want to upgrade fully into 3D (receiver etc). How do you know 3D won't cause you eyestrain on a regular basis and you don't want to go there? Better to spend very little to find out rather than upgrading everything for no reason. What's the problem? 720p not good enough! Most people here couldn't tell the difference on a 100" screen from 10' back between 1080p and 720p anyway. The big problem for most, including myself, is that we like to, at least be, close to the cutting edge and if we don't try 3D we'll be considered somewhat as outsiders on this forum because it is obviously going full steam ahead into the third dimension.

thanks.

Mark, I agree. You basically tell me that my comments are in the wrong forum, and then proceed to correct me by saying almost exactly what I said ableit more concisely.

I really fail to see how commenting on the various architectures of 3D front-projection design isn't relevent to the thread? I'm not free-blogging about whether or not I like 3D or think it will succeed or fail... just a technical conversation about the various methods for 3D delivery in front-projection devices, and even my comments about active designs versus passive were specific to front-projection issues. That's entirely on-par with talking about filter options for stacked projectors and the like. And since price is a very real factor in purchasing any front projection system, 3D or not, exploring how different approaches to 3D front projection delivery might mitigate costs is also germane to this thread.

Since we have exactly one "home theater" 3D front projector that's actually been announced thus far, and it just happens to be $10K passive, any conversation outside of this one specific device is going to sound like a theoretical discussion only by virtue of the latency of products coming to market. However, it's important to talk about all of the options that will be on the table as 3D is a new topic with bran-new terms and many AVS enthusiasts new to the 3D game may not even realize that there many alternative means to delivery 3D images via front projection... with various PQ advantages, disadvantages, and price-points. The same conversations will sound very non-theoretical after the next CEDIA exhibition.

I'm very much looking forward to the 3D projectors, but what's with this "silver screen" nonsense (no offense to silver screen aficionados ). I actually use no screen as aesthetically that works best in my set-up, have done that for years, and love it. I run a 140" image and can't imagine not only the screen but the added expense.

Also, in terms of replacing receivers, is it not possible to do a firmware upgrade to a receiver to support HDMI 1.4? To be specific, I use a Denon 4308 which I bought last year which I don't want to replace. I'm more than willing to throw down $3K for a 1080p 3D PJ when they get around this price, but I don't want to have to replace everything else since I built my set-up within a year ago. And I really do hope the PS3 will be 3D-compatible, which I understand it will be.

Also, is there any chance there might a new technology introduced which can utilize current 1080p projectors for 3D? Maybe with a lower frame-rate? I'm thinking someone's gotta be working on something like this when so many 1080p or even 720p sets have been sold already.

Planar 8150 / Runco Ls 5
Bob williams stating 3d compatibility, It's a 60Hz refresh rate but what the heck, if it works.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post13883660

Bob said in that thread:


Which means that this projector is no more "3D compatible" than any other 60Hz display on the market. Not only is 30Hz per eye not acceptable for a true 3D display, but the projector itself has no ability to sync with LCD shutter glasses so it's just "flying blind" as a 2D product relying on the consumer to create the 3D experience by syncronized glasses by some other means.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that one couldn't or that one shouldn't enjoy 3D content on this machine if they want... just that it's not a "3D" projector any more than any other 2D projector or display.

Mark knows more about this so he can give more detail, but the basic story is that *for polarized (passive) 3D projection* you need a silver screen to keep the light directional and to maintain brightness since you sacrifice brightness via the polarized filters. There are also more expensive passive/filter options that aren't polarized and don't need a special screen.

For active 3D (shutter glasses) no special screen is required.

In theory any two 2d projectors can be used to display 3D. You basically have to split the 3d source which I expect will br 48 for films from 3D bluray and 120 for live video. that would give 24 to each machine for film and 60 to each machine for video. the signals are different for each machine, with one being for the left machine (left eye) and one being for the right machine (right eye). So congratulations,you now use your computer to provide the split signals. You won`t get 3D unless you put a pair of filters in or in front of each machine and use the same filters in a pair of glasses. And,if you use polarizers (either linear ofr circular) you must use a silver screen.The primary reason is that the silver screen does not diffuse the image, It maintains the polarization. they generally have high gain but diffuse screens of high gain can be used for all other types of 3D (that is not using polarizers). If one uses the filters dolby 3D theaters use,the filters are narrow band filters licensed and supplied by a german company called Infitec. These filters require like filters in the glasses.But any screen willdo.The filters are narrow nand color filters and are not polarization filters.They dohowever shift the colors a bit and for perfection the colors require correction.infitec makes a box that does this or one could use internalCMSs in the projector or a video processor BUT two CMSs would be needed in an external box if the projectors donot each have a full CMS.

Now machines that don`t use filters but alternatively flash the left and right eye sgnal,either fromone machine or somehow from two machines. shutter glasses synced tothe flashes will produce 3d. I am really no expert here and I may have part of this wrong.But the light losses are hugh for all these systems.just for an example,the shutters are lcd and when open for one eye are not fully transmissive.other factors are the hold of the flash.When the entire picture is up it is held for some time period.the longer,the more light you get.There is a lot to understand here and I hope to take some courses and learn a lot more.Silver screens.Ugh.They hotspot and color shift and the FP HT world is not going towant to switch screens to silver or have to use two different screens.Sothe only FPI view as viable is the Infitec filters or shutter glasses.Getting enough light will stillbe a big problem. we are talking 80%light loses in 3D.That is what I have read.And using light canon machines usuallymean lousy on off CR and inaccurate colors at pushing toget maximumlumens.Now there are expensive machines that have plenty of light and willuse shutter glass non filter systems and these machines will work if supplied with the right signal. Please jumpin and correct me guys.

If you were to use the infitec in a single projector setup, how do you sync the infitec colorwheel with the alternate left and right images? Can you even buy an external wheel to put in front of the lens? If so what is the cost? I don't see how a CMS would work in a single projector setup since the color will be different in alternate frames. I think you would need to also buy the Infitec "box". Any idea on cost for the complete package?

DaViD,

Apparently, Mark H was/is correct when he posted that shutter glasses cut light output by more than 50%.

In their Mits XD600U review, Projector Central posted that quote: "We mentioned that 3D mode on the XD600U cuts lumen output rather drastically, but there are also the 3D glasses themselves to consider. Since the glasses operate through the action of an LCD shutter, they do cut light output significantly - about 70%."

For example, they found that when the XD600U's 3D mode was set to "on", the projector's lumens dropped from 4,500 to only 2,580 for 3D content.

Then, when the LCD shutter glasses are used, these 2,580 lumens are futher reduced to only 775 lumens.

It looks like Mark is correct, IMO.

One must also consider the screen type with 3d projectors. I saw the LG demo at CES and they were using a silver screen. I know that this type of screen will create hot spots with 2d viewing. Much work will have to be done to get the right combo.

The Infitec system that Dolby 3D uses,BTW the list of Dolby3D theaters shows theater existence in the west but nothing in the east, uses a single projector with a two blade filter rotator in a chamber right after the light source, a color correction box, and passive Infitect filter glasses. Iknow of nothing available in the consumer market tospinfilters and sync them tothe source. I assume such a device could be placed in front of the lens BUT.Anyhow it doesn`t exist to my knowledge.
The biggest drawback of the Infiltec systemwhich really if one has two projectors by canabilizing one set of glasses and using one or more glasses for viewing is that there is a need tocolor correct. From what I understand,the color errors are not really bothersome but on bright scenes they are visible, is the need tocolor correct each projector. The US importer does sella box to dothis but it isn`t cheap. I don`t remember how much.I think the best meaning cheapest solution would be to use twoprojectors having CMS built in.Then allone would need is some glasses including one to canabilize toput in front of the primary lens for each projector.

Check out the thread - 3D - I have two similar pjs now what? and read Kamus's posts and experiences with respect to using two projectors and the Dolby system and using one pair of glasses as filters for his projectors. It is cheap to do if you already have the projectors and he gives some costs.