or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › The Ultimate 3D projection system: A Practical Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Ultimate 3D projection system: A Practical Discussion Thread - Page 5

post #121 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikotttin View Post

Hi every one,

Check out the blog of projector reviews. Art seems to have received an Optoma box for testing testing!

Interestingly the box is not called 3D-XL but XP8000.

Cheers

OK - I went wider with a web search, and I think this is the page you were looking at.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/blog/2010/10/

I'm looking forward to hearing more about it. Looks like he only received 1 unit and might not be able to test our configuration proposed here tho...

Maybe he can test with a single 1080p projector with a lieft or right view, and also see if he gets 24p output capability at 1080p left or right...
post #122 of 2268
Good you found it because I cannot post links thanks to all these dear spammers :-)
As usual wait and see....
post #123 of 2268
OK, an update to this thread. We talked before about the feasibility to use lenses from a pair of Dolby 3D glasses to filter the light from two projectors and in this way create a 3D setup at home. There was a discussion whether the glasses themselves only let through specific wavelengths or if they only blocked specific wavelengths. Do you need to buy a special projector filter or can you use the glasses as filters?

Darin has lend me the lenses from his glasses and I have measured them at work. The instrument used was a Varian Cary 50 scientific spectrophotometer scanning between 800 and 280 nm. I measured absorbance which is defined as the tenth logarithm of [the incident light intensity divided by the remaining light intensity]. An absorbance of one means you let 10% of the light through at the specific wavelength, two - 1% and so on. The scale on the instrument goes to 10 but it's not very accurate over 1, i.e you wont get a linear response anymore. I usually dilute my samples to get the absorbance below 0.5 to be sure to have a linear response. However that is a bit difficult with glasses...

As you can see from the graph the gaps in the spectrum's are overlapping a bit at an absorbance of 1.2 and higher (which corresponds to about 6% transmittance). This could potentially cause some crosstalk. However, if a narrow wavelength light source is used this could be minimized or eliminated by staying away from the edges of the gaps where they overlap. Parts of the violet spectrum is also visible for both glasses and the left seem to be letting through some light at the blue gap for the right lens.

I had a look at different UHP projector spectrums and it seems they differ somewhat which makes the choice of projector important. For instance the VW85 it really is low on light between 500 and 510 nm which is smack in the middle of the green gap for the right eye. The Epson TW5500 looks a bit higher even though it still is a bit low. The Xenon powered VW200 looks significantly better for green even if this also would become neutered, but is instead very low at 600 nm - which corresponds to red for the right eye. Therefore it might be difficult to just put these glasses in front of a normal projector without loosing too much light. This since you would need to tame all the other five colors to match the lowest one. Perhaps if one was able to change the internal filtering to allow for a wider spectrum (vivid mode?), otherwise some colors would be very dim and consequently the calibrated light output really, really low. I don't know if there are other possibilities? Replace the internal filter with a customized one that allow wider wavelengths? I know cine4home has played with different filters.

On the flip side, at their specific wavelength intervals the glasses let through almost all of the light. If an LED or laser projector could be designed with the 6 correct native wavelengths the light efficiency would be very high - about 90% for each eye - or 45% of the light in 2D mode.

Is this the future? An LED with six LEDs instead of three wouldn't seem that much harder to make than todays machines. Cheaper, thinner, simpler glasses, no batteries needed, any screen works, high light efficiency. More expensive projector design though, but I gather the LEDs will go down quickly in price....
LL
LL
LL
post #124 of 2268
Thanks Drexler. Very interesting results. I'm going to have to think about what that first graph means with respect to the measurements I did and posted about earlier:
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Here is what I got for measurements with a 100 IRE full screen image with an Epson 9500UB:

No filters: 51.8
Green filter on projector: 33.9
Green filter on projector and green filter on meter: 26.9
Green filter on projector and red filter on meter: .23

Red filter on projector: 8.8
Red filter on projector and red filter on meter: 7.4
Red filter on projector and green filter on meter: .16

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

My numbers measuring off the white piece of paper outside about half an hour ago using a Minolta LS-110 were (in cd/m2):

No filter: 17500
Green filter: 3600
Red filter: 8200
Both filters: 56

For instance, even with some overlap on some wavelengths and using sunlight off a white piece of paper the 2 filters on top of each other resulted in very little light. I was assuming the white piece of paper would reflect basically the whole spectrum, but I'm not really positive that is the case.

--Darin
post #125 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Thanks Drexler. Very interesting results. I'm going to have to think about what that first graph means with respect to the measurements I did and posted about earlier:
For instance, even with some overlap on some wavelengths and using sunlight off a white piece of paper the 2 filters on top of each other resulted in very little light. I was assuming the white piece of paper would reflect basically the whole spectrum, but I'm not really positive that is the case.

--Darin

Now, I don't remember which was green and red and I have already packed them again... However, it does't really matter for the discussion that much. Unless you have the spectrum for the 9500UB? In which case it would be interesting to see how the gaps in the spectrum fits with the projector output.

The light you get to your meter is the combined light from all three wavelengths. So even if you get 8.8 and 33.9 respectively out of the original 51.8, doesn't mean you have equal amounts of all colors. It could easily be that you from one of the glasses get quite a lot of for instance green and blue, but almost no red. Then you'd have to strangle the green and blue to get the correct color balance again - loosing a lot of light in the process.

I looked through the glasses on top of each other, at the sky and at my computer screen, and could easily see through them with a violet tint. This kinda makes sense from the graph as there's leakage between 350 to about 410 nm for both glasses - corresponding to the violet part of the spectrum. I'm guessing the leakage from the overlap at the gaps will roughly become white light as there's a slight overlap for both red, green and blue, making the violet leakage dominant in color.
post #126 of 2268
#
Art Feierman Says:
November 8th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

Yep, that’s it. As I mentioned, the XP8000 that arrived I inadvertently assumed that was the 3D adapter, but it was the external battery for the Optoma Pk301. I’ve been so swamped with the move (the whole house is under remodel, and I’ve just gotten internet up (first time since Wed). I’ve been meaning to correct that mention. I’ve spoken with Optoma, they will ship me one, when they have them. They did not, as of last week. -a
post #127 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil68 View Post

#
Art Feierman Says:
November 8th, 2010 at 10:38 pm

Yep, that's it. As I mentioned, the XP8000 that arrived I inadvertently assumed that was the 3D adapter, but it was the external battery for the Optoma Pk301. I've been so swamped with the move (the whole house is under remodel, and I've just gotten internet up (first time since Wed). I've been meaning to correct that mention. I've spoken with Optoma, they will ship me one, when they have them. They did not, as of last week. -a

Thanks for the update, Phil.

Yes, I was wondering why they would have changed the name from 3D-XL to XP8000.

Hopefully Art will have one to test soon - I've put in some requests that he test the features needed for a 2 x 1080p setup, and also for the 24p output.

Crossing fingers!!

This thread is a little slow right now, as we wait for the new projectors to ship, and for the various components to arrive.

Meanwhile, I've loaded up on 3D content to practice with.
post #128 of 2268
So all this effort because nobody sells a box with a set of shutter glasses that will can take a 3D HDMI signal (say 1080p/60fps e.g. from a 3D blu-ray player), split it into 2 HDMI outputs L and R you can run into 2 of the same model projector focused at a typical 2D screen (output at 120fps)? Forgive me if I'm way off base here, but wouldn't this set-up work fine to allow you to see a bright 3D image without all the polarizing this, that and the other thing?
post #129 of 2268
That wouldn't work. Shutter glasses are useless with Dual projectors. Framerates do not add up, two projectors at 60fps don't make 120fps.
The entire point of dual projectors is to get rid of the shutter glasses, use passive ones and have the left and right eye views shown simultaneously for a better picture, free of any motion artefacts caused by shutter glasses.
post #130 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Ta da!! For those of you who were worries, fear not! The thread is still alive!

Have now received one of the two RS40 units. The first set of circular polarized lenses are on the way for Monday, and Optoma is shipping the two 3Dxl boxes on Monday!
post #131 of 2268
Brilliant news..looking forward to your updates!.i`m thinking of going the same way..when`s the second RS40 coming?
post #132 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbotwo2 View Post

Brilliant news..looking forward to your updates!.i`m thinking of going the same way..when`s the second RS40 coming?

Got the call last week but was busy with work and it slipped me. I may do the first run with the 550 and the RS40, even though there is a big light difference.

That should give me enough to work on until the second RS40 arrives.

The first polarizing filters were easily available "cheapies". I'm actually amazed how cheap they were, at $25 for the pair. The second pair are being custom made by Advisol at more like 10 or 20 times that cost.

I'll be very curious to see the performance difference!

Big work weekend coming up next week with an industry event/expo in my line of work, so may not be able to give a lot of feedback till the following week - but it will get posted soon enough for sure!

Getting all excited again about this. I have 20 pairs of RealD glasses, now, ready for that big first screening day!
post #133 of 2268
Hey, that's good news !

What type of screen are you using ? Did you get the BlackDiamond or did you opt for more traditional silverscreens ?
post #134 of 2268
Quote:
I had a look at different UHP projector spectrums and it seems they differ somewhat which makes the choice of projector important. For instance the VW85 it really is low on light between 500 and 510 nm which is smack in the middle of the green gap for the right eye. The Epson TW5500 looks a bit higher even though it still is a bit low. The Xenon powered VW200 looks significantly better for green even if this also would become neutered, but is instead very low at 600 nm - which corresponds to red for the right eye. Therefore it might be difficult to just put these glasses in front of a normal projector without loosing too much light. This since you would need to tame all the other five colors to match the lowest one. Perhaps if one was able to change the internal filtering to allow for a wider spectrum (vivid mode?), otherwise some colors would be very dim and consequently the calibrated light output really, really low. I don't know if there are other possibilities? Replace the internal filter with a customized one that allow wider wavelengths? I know cine4home has played with different filters.

On the flip side, at their specific wavelength intervals the glasses let through almost all of the light. If an LED or laser projector could be designed with the 6 correct native wavelengths the light efficiency would be very high - about 90% for each eye - or 45% of the light in 2D mode.

Is this the future? An LED with six LEDs instead of three wouldn't seem that much harder to make than todays machines. Cheaper, thinner, simpler glasses, no batteries needed, any screen works, high light efficiency. More expensive projector design though, but I gather the LEDs will go down quickly in price....
You read my mind: passive 3D without a special screen.

I've also wondered with LED or wide-spectrum light source if a single-chassis projector could work if the spectrum filtering could be done in the digital domain? Perhaps that's asking too much from electronics? But my mind wonders if similar to the way that DLP driven RealD 3D is actually sequential left/right projection switching polarization instantly on the fly, I wonder if something similar could be done for Dolby's color spectrum? A mechanically moving filter or "color wheel" might work... just imagine if the usual color wheel was replaced by one designed with Dolby's 3D light spectrum in mind... or if an LED light source without a color wheel, perhaps 3D could throw a color wheel back in for 3D that would rotate in front of the DMD chip to altnernate left/right with the shift in color spectrum?
post #135 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet View Post

I've also wondered with LED or wide-spectrum light source if a single-chassis projector could work if the spectrum filtering could be done in the digital domain? Perhaps that's asking too much from electronics? But my mind wonders if similar to the way that DLP driven RealD 3D is actually sequential left/right projection switching polarization instantly on the fly, I wonder if something similar could be done for Dolby's color spectrum? A mechanically moving filter or "color wheel" might work... just imagine if the usual color wheel was replaced by one designed with Dolby's 3D light spectrum in mind... or if an LED light source without a color wheel, perhaps 3D could throw a color wheel back in for 3D that would rotate in front of the DMD chip to altnernate left/right with the shift in color spectrum?

Hmmm, now that I think about it. - It should be possible to use a 6 segment color wheel that produces 2 slightly different versions of red, green and blue in a normal 1-chip DLP. In this case they wouldn't need to change much of the design, just a more expensive color wheel and new processing.

The downside would be that the light output in 2D would be very low (only 2X that of 3D) since you filter out a lot of the light - so in this case maybe only 10-20% of what you would get in 2D with a normal color wheel. (Assuming Dolby 3D looses about 90-95% of the light, which is what I've heard).
post #136 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam View Post

... and Optoma is shipping the two 3Dxl boxes on Monday!

Where are you getting these from?
post #137 of 2268
Has it been confirmed the Optoma's split the output?

I was thinking about trying the mini radiances but that would get a wee bit expensive.
post #138 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Hmmm, now that I think about it. - It should be possible to use a 6 segment color wheel that produces 2 slightly different versions of red, green and blue in a normal 1-chip DLP. In this case they wouldn't need to change much of the design, just a more expensive color wheel and new processing.

The downside would be that the light output in 2D would be very low (only 2X that of 3D) since you filter out a lot of the light - so in this case maybe only 10-20% of what you would get in 2D with a normal color wheel. (Assuming Dolby 3D looses about 90-95% of the light, which is what I've heard).

If the color wheel actually was the Dolby/Infitec filters, separated into the 6 bandpasses, for 2D you take off your glasses and combine the images for the left and right into one for both and almost the whole spectrum will come through. At least enough for any decent CMS to fix (you'll need one for the 3D anyway!

At the ~ OD 1.6 crossovers in your earlier spectrum, you will have ~ 3% projected and of that 3% allowed into the wrong eye, sound like quite a low crosstalk, but LEDs and lasers could eliminate even that overlap.
post #139 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJSJones View Post

If the color wheel actually was the Dolby/Infitec filters, separated into the 6 bandpasses, for 2D you take off your glasses and combine the images for the left and right into one for both and almost the whole spectrum will come through. At least enough for any decent CMS to fix (you'll need one for the 3D anyway!

Not really. At any point in time only one part of each color will get through - remember the image is built on the colors being shown sequentially. This means that the accumulated numbers of photons on the screen per unit time will be lower since some are absorbed in the filter. I.e. the light output will go down.

To make an easy example. Say red is divided in two parts with slightly different wavelengths. Each constitute 50% of red. When the colorfilter is on red1 - red2 will be filtered out and vice versa. So in any point in time only 50% of the red light will get through. And that's the theoretical maximum. So with this technique it wouldn't be possible to achieve more than 50% of what's possible with a normal color wheel. And I'm guessing this figure will be even lower in reality.

It's actually exactly the same things as a 3-chip DLP vs a 1-chip. A 1-chip only shows 1 of 3 colors at a time whereas the 3-chipper shows all 3. Therefore it will only produce 1/3 the light and thus is less bright. Now, with the infitec filters you have 6 colors instead of 3 - so only 1/6 of the light from the original 3-chipper will get through.
post #140 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Not really. At any point in time only one part of each color will get through - remember the image is built on the colors being shown sequentially. This means that the accumulated numbers of photons on the screen per unit time will be lower since some are absorbed in the filter. I.e. the light output will go down.

To make an easy example. Say red is divided in two parts with slightly different wavelengths. Each constitute 50% of red. When the colorfilter is on red1 - red2 will be filtered out and vice versa. So in any point in time only 50% of the red light will get through. And that's the theoretical maximum. So with this technique it wouldn't be possible to achieve more than 50% of what's possible with a normal color wheel. And I'm guessing this figure will be even lower in reality.

It's actually exactly the same things as a 3-chip DLP vs a 1-chip. A 1-chip only shows 1 of 3 colors at a time whereas the 3-chipper shows all 3. Therefore it will only produce 1/3 the light and thus is less bright. Now, with the infitec filters you have 6 colors instead of 3 - so only 1/6 of the light from the original 3-chipper will get through.

You're right - I was thinking of the passive system for non-wheel systems, when the same image is fed to both bandpass sets and you take the glasses off - that's when the 2D gets brighter - both eyes getting both sets instead of only one in the 3D mode. I'll go back to sleep now and wait for LED/laser systems...
post #141 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

The downside would be that the light output in 2D would be very low (only 2X that of 3D) since you filter out a lot of the light - so in this case maybe only 10-20% of what you would get in 2D with a normal color wheel. (Assuming Dolby 3D looses about 90-95% of the light, which is what I've heard).

The light losses aren't that terrible with Dolby 3D.
The less than 10% remaining light relative to 2D is a value I remember reading on an old Barco spreadsheet, but I've read other professional sources (Harkness-screens) estimating Dolby 3D around 15% remaining light relative to 2D, a value comparable with shutter glasses and RealD Z-screen based polarised presentation. And this is calculated using a traditional single DLP projector already equipped with standard colour filters, to which the Dolby/Infitec filter disc is added.

If you were to replace the original colour filters with infitec filters, you would definitely get higher light outputs.
A purpose built dual projector based Dolby/Infitec system should yield just as much light as a polarised system.
post #142 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackShark View Post

The light losses aren't that terrible with Dolby 3D.
The less than 10% remaining light relative to 2D is a value I remember reading on an old Barco spreadsheet, but I've read other professional sources (Harkness-screens) estimating Dolby 3D around 15% remaining light relative to 2D, a value comparable with shutter glasses and RealD Z-screen based polarised presentation. And this is calculated using a traditional single DLP projector already equipped with standard colour filters, to which the Dolby/Infitec filter disc is added.

If you were to replace the original colour filters with infitec filters, you would definitely get higher light outputs.
A purpose built dual projector based Dolby/Infitec system should yield just as much light as a polarised system.

That sounds a lot better! The figure I've heard before I think comes from Mark Haflich, 93% if my memory serves me correct. But I'll bet it depends on the setup, which projector that is used and so forth.

15% X2 gives 30% in 2D which isn't that bad if you start off with a lot (1500 lumens?) and have a higher gain screen like the HP. In addition the brightness difference between 2D and 3D wouldn't be night and day anymore - as it is today.

An infitec system would definitely be my first choice. It's the only one I've seen without screwed up colors. Both shutter and polarized glasses have added a tint (greenish or purplish) to whites that is quite objectionable in my opinion. Not so in the Dolby 3D theater I've visited. In addition it's passive with cheaper, simpler glasses (vs shutter) without batteries and sync issues and most importantly - any screen will work.
post #143 of 2268
I didn't notice the screwed up colour with polarised displays. And with shutter glasses, when it happens it's always due to a hardware fault : badly designed glasses that do have a tint where they should not have any, or on my system, the internal polarisation of the projector that interferes with the filter.
Nothing that can't be corrected with a purpose built system though.

Dolby/Infitec however does also screw up colour by design, and is a much worse than the other solutions out there will achieve accidentally.
The difference is that Infitec does provide an optional colour corrector that balances the colour back to normal, but it's expensive. Most people building Infitec systems just use the filters from the glasses which they put in front of their projectors.
post #144 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackShark View Post

I didn't notice the screwed up colour with polarised displays. And with shutter glasses, when it happens it's always due to a hardware fault : badly designed glasses that do have a tint where they should not have any, or on my system, the internal polarisation of the projector that interferes with the filter.
Nothing that can't be corrected with a purpose built system though.

I think the tint is inherent in the shutter glasses. My guess is that the tiny lines from the polarization filter causes interference effects increasing/decreasing the amplitude of certain wavelengths, which gives rise to the observed tint.

It might be curable with a color calibration through the glasses though.
post #145 of 2268
I find the whole thread interesting. It appears many in the thread are AV specialists trying to set up 3D systems. I neednt have to remind professionals of the patents protecting this form of 3D projection.
post #146 of 2268
What are you talking about?
post #147 of 2268
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

Has it been confirmed the Optoma's split the output?

I was thinking about trying the mini radiances but that would get a wee bit expensive.

It doesn't split the outputs per sae....

You need two on them.
Feed them the same HDMI 3D content
there is a 3 position switch for video output on the back so one unit can be set L and the other be set R.
post #148 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

Has it been confirmed the Optoma's split the output?

I was thinking about trying the mini radiances but that would get a wee bit expensive.

The Optoma 3DXL box will split the 3D signal into two, but only up to 720p according to what they told me at CEDIA. When we get into 1080p output, tho, 2 boxes are required.

John is correct - there is a switch on the back to choose which channel is output from the original stream, by each box.
post #149 of 2268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 226178 View Post

I find the whole thread interesting. It appears many in the thread are AV specialists trying to set up 3D systems. I neednt have to remind professionals of the patents protecting this form of 3D projection.

First of all, I'm pleased that you signed up to AVS just to participate in this discussion. You will find this an excellent community to discover and discuss all sorts of great concepts and practical implementations relating to Audio/Video. The forum is filled with hobbyists, both professional and amateur.

However, I must correct you - there is no legal impediment to creating a stereo 3D projection system using polarised lenses - whether that be circular polarised (as RealD uses), linear polarised (as IMAX uses), or otherwise. Now if I built said system and tried to sell it with a RealD sticker on the front, that would certainly be an issue.

If I wanted to, I could even buy lenses for the Dolby 3D system and use those on my projectors too (and may well play with those at some point to see the differences in extinction/separation).

As it is, this is really just a proof of concept to (a) give myself a really stokin' 3D home theater, and (b) to show others what can be done, should they want to try it as well.

It's going to be a fun ride.
post #150 of 2268
Thread Starter 
OK - have updated the first three posts to reflected new information and news...

BTW - the two 3DXL boxes from Optoma arrived today! yes!

Also, Optoma have informed me that there will be a firmware update in February which will allow the boxes to output the original 1080p24 left and right channel streams when separating 3D Bluray content. Excellent work!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › The Ultimate 3D projection system: A Practical Discussion Thread