Originally Posted by CAVX
Whether you like the story or not, this film is pure eye and ear candy and would make awesome demo material. Shame the BD is not going to be Scope.
Indeed, and logically, since the "scope" version is pure eye candy, the 1.78 BD will be 33% more eye candy.
Facts. Gotta love 'em.
Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot
It's not just me:
KelvinS1965 was a zoomer who bought a lens just to see what it was like with the intent of selling it on as he was more than happy with zooming. After comparing the two he much preferred the image with the lens and kept it. His sig reflects that.
Art Sonneborn sits at around SMPTEs closest (2 x image height IIRC, 61 degrees horizontal viewing angle) and he clearly sees pixels with zooming from the front row. He has to move to the back (3rd) row of his theatre before the image becomes acceptable to him. With a lens he can sit in his front row.
Maybe you can't see pixels but you can still see a difference with 1080 and a lens if you sit close enough for it to matter. If it wasn't the case, there would be little or no difference for it to matter, and no one would buy the lenses since we'd all be happy with zooming.
And it's also not just Rich that is skeptical of this claim. I project a 159" diagonal 16:9 image, and I have to get far closer than comfortable to see pixel structure.
You can sit well within spec and not be able to see pixel structure. This is a fact.
In the very extreme end of acceptable seating, you have where Art's first row is. For DLP, up to 2.14x height you can resolve pixel structure, past that point, it's not so clear. 2.5x Height and further you are definitely not capable of resolving pixel structure. For LCoS obviously you have to be closer than these numbers to resolve pixels.
Pixel structure is only changed in the vertical realm with an A-lens, so you are only improving one dimension. If you are sitting at 2x image height and can resolve pixel structure, then adding a lens will only reduce this, not eliminate it (at best). You will still have an identical horizontal pixel size.
All of this is really a moot point for anyone sitting 1 screen width or further away.
You'd be surprised at how few people sit at distances anywhere approaching 2x image height.
Use this calculator to plug in your seating and screen size and it will provide you a lot of these distances, as well as the PPD (Pixels Per Degree). Anything under 30 PPD is noticeable, and 35 or greater is definitely not. Again, I believe that's for DLP, so LCoS will be able to sit closer than those ranges and not resolve pixel structure (LCD, further away).http://home.roadrunner.com/~res18h39/calculator.htmTo sum it up (and you can read the sources linked on that page that back this up scientifically) an A-lens would do nothing for me as far as pixel resolvability goes. I simply cannot, and am nowhere near resolving pixels sitting at SMPTE Reference distance.