The Official Acer H9500BD Thread - Page 41

Jmalto, I just dug out my calculations for a 120" screen. Seems it is from 5%-30% so for my 120" I figured anywhere from 2.9" to 17.7" offset assuming no horizontal lens shift is used. Does that sound about right guys who have the unit mounted? The lens shift only goes in one direction allowing for more offset IIANM.

PC games support 1080p 60hz frame packing with DisplayPort or dual DVI. HDMI doesn't support this, so the best you can get from the current consoles is 1080p 60hz SBS, or 720p 60hz frame packing. For most gaming, 24hz is too slow.

This projectors SBS tearing issue makes the SBS mode unplayable in my opinion ... but 720p works adequately.

I know most likely why he is having problems with the lens shift. More than likely he has some HORIZONTAL SHIFT enabled, you cannot use Horizontal Shift and still get the same amount of vertical shift and vice versa. He needs to make sure his H-SHIFT is back to zero, perhaps a factory reset. Some projectors don't even ship with H-SHIFT zero'd out believe it or not (my JVC had H-SHIFT and V-SHIFT enabled when I got it).

I just noticed that this projector has HORIZONTAL shift and VERTICAL shift. Even if you accidentally barely nudge the horizontal shift, you will lose a huge amount of vertical shift in the process.


These diagrams can be confusing in manuals and sometimes even wrong, but I double check what they mean in writing by reading the instructions (don't recall if the Acer had clarification in writing or not).

Thanks Coder and Mike. Unfortunately in my gaming room I have a ceiling fan and it is really screwing with the installation for a high shelf mount. I am pretty sure I 0'd out any horizontal shift but I will go check to see if I can get any additional out of it.

Hi Guys,

Im new to this forum

I currently have an Acer H5360BD and I'm planning to buy a new 1080p 3D projector.

I want to know which of the two is better in 3D image quality sharp and smooth 3d image with LOTS of detail. I also want deep blacks, good contrast and a bright image.

The Acer 9500 will have better contrast, deeper blacks, zero ghosting in 3D. My guess is Acer 9500 is sharper too, and also has horizontal and vertical lens shift for easier mounting, and that film quality look DLP has versus LCD's more digital look. I have two Epsons here including the 8100 which should be close to the 3010 in picture quality, the Acer 9500 trounces it.

5% plus 25% equals a total of 30% offset right? The total offset is still 30% no matter how you do the math, at least me. Look at it another way, the minumum offset is 5%. The diagram indicates there is an "additional" 25% of shift. To me that adds up to a total of 30%.

Jmalto I too have a ceiling fan that is going to have to come down.

Sigh. From page 17 of the manual:

OK well someone still needs to test it, because this is not what Art has said when he tested it.

I probably saw the discrepancy when I was reading the manual and Art's understanding, when I see a discrepancy I'll often take the safer side when the discrepancy is small.

All this means is my calculator is showing a slightly less maximum offset than what can be obtained, but that shouldn't have messed anyone up at all, because it just means you can get a slightly larger offset (closer to the ceiling).

OK, I will try to measure/test this on the wall with a smaller pic before I mount the unit and verify for you. I may have to make a list of things to test lest I forget and just put it up.

I just came back from Best Buy (3 hour round trip, i live in the middle of no-where). I told them i wanted an extra pair of glasses for it.

"Ok, take these passive ones".

"No, it is RF glasses, not passive"

"Ok, how about these?"

"No, it isnt passive technology"

"Ok, let me look at optoma website"

5 minutes later..."Ok, it IS RF, let me see what we have" *searches best buy website for 3d RF* "These rocketfish glasses showed on search and we have them in stock!!"

"No, those rocketfish glasses are passive"

"Oh, sorry, then we dont have any!"

Hi all,

New potential projector owner in the near future and the Acer seems to be a good fit of price and performance.

My question is I am confused on this offset stuff and my projector is mounted near dead center of a 100" screen. Will I be able to use this unit or will it require a ceiling mount?

Thanks.

You would have to use a floor or high-shelf mount or ceiling mount, you cannot mount it between the screen or in the center.

What kind of answer did you expect from 9500 owners page ? try posting it on 3010 pages too !

This is my fair advice, do your research and get one that matches your needs... But then again, see if you can get your hands on the other one.... You may be surprised with what you like eventually inspite of your research because no amount of reading can match your own personal experience

And good news is Amazon carries both and has amazing return policies....for what it's worth, 3010 is the cheapest at $1340 now with 2 free glasses and 2 years Epson warranty...factor these into your research... Don't skimp on warranty as now more and more folks are discovering issues that seem hard to fix and are pulling their hair out when the manufacturer shows their true colors

Also I unsubscribed this thread and so have not been following it off late...but had to peek in once in a while when I get bored ! What's great to see is Mike2cents finally bit the bullet and I wish him that he will like it as much as he imagined it ! Also mike don't leave it UPS for too long, they will return it to sender after 5 days (atleast on amazon purchases)

Another funny thing i noticed is I thought people put down LCD's for their film like look and prefer DLP as it looks like a TV (quoting mike).... But now I see some posts that claim DLP has better film like image than LCD (quoting coderguy whom I clearly remember saying the opposite in early posts) !

Thanks falafala. I did not heed your advice and we will see how it goes. Whatever you call the "look" from these different technologies I think I prefer DLP. I am going to get a real good chance to compare since I still have my 8350. Worst case scenario I send the 9500 back. Thanks for the tip on UPS, rest assured it will be picked up tomorrow. Feel free to drop in anytime. Notice I have stayed away from the 3010 thread?

Just like I am staying away fom the others

But not much is going on there as well...I think the mass honeymoon and euphoria when each of these PJs were released is over...thats what made 2011 memorable ! People now are moving on to discovering issues and chasing fixes.....sucks ! As for me I am going crazy looking for 3d content.... A lot of good movies are going to be released in next few months....but it can expensive to us them all...may try the 3d rental site for some though

The_Fat - go over to Projectorreviews website and see for yourself. Too bad Art did not finish the Competitors part of the review, I wonder why not? There's enough there to give you an idea, take a look at the screenshots and judge for yourself. Falafala respectfully I don't think you can disclaim my comments based entirely upon owner's bias (although I admit still on honeymoon). The only area the 3010 may beat the 9500 is on colors, but that is not conclusive either. As far as the 9500 looking more like film, that is what I noticed while watching Super 8 in 2D and posted here yesterday. DLP looks more like film than LCD to me.

Funny thing, my cable provider offers about 6 titles I have not seen and since I have HBO there is about 5 others so I won't be buying those. This all I just discovered about 2 weeks ago so I really got antsy. Tomorrow night it begins as my TV does not do SBS and I decided to pass on the convertor and get a PJ.

Sorry I didn't mean to discount you other than pointing to him other options....if you noticed I didn't say a word as to which is better other than to add a few things that might help him in general ..... I for one learnt that this PJ thing is very personal choice... I don't remembering going through so many varied opinions when I bought my tv... I guess that what makes this fun hobby

I am sorry but this is not true, I have never once said LCD is more film-like than DLP or LCOS. One thing about these forums is people are quick to put words in peoples' mouths.

I think you saw LCOS over DLP is more film-like and thought I said LCD. There is always some chance I made a misprint, but if I did, sorry I didn't mean it. I may have been referring to a Panny's smooth-screen over another LCD, but never have said an LCD being more film-like than a DLP or LCOS.

LCOS and DLP are more film-like due to pixel fill, LCD is more TV-like.

I felt the Epson 5010 is a very nice image as I said, and can give the JVC RS-45 some competition considering the Epsons stomps it in 3D, but overall I prefer the film-look of DLP and LCOS over LCD. When it comes to budget projectors under $2000, I usually pick DLP's for most people's uses, unless they are RBE sensitive or mainly shooting for movies in which occasionally I'll recommend an Epson 8700ub or something as it has better blacks. Overall though, I don't go around claiming LCD is more film-like.

Lemme know how the SBS goes. I download movies, and most of them are SBS 3D. I tried Kung Fu Panda 2 on the GT750 and it looked good, my wife liked the 3D. I almost finished downloading Avatar, so going to try that soon. Everything is being fed from my windows home server to my PS3 using PS3 media server.

Also trying Uncharted 3 to see how that looks.

No problem, it is a personal choice. After seeing the original Epson 1080 at CES way back when, I bought one and immediately became an Epson fanboy. Then when the 8100 came out I bought that one, they are both still here. The technology advances so quickly, I never could pony up for the UB series. In fact it seems like the 1080 costs near $3000 when I bought it, can't remember exactly. Never thought I would buy an Acer projector, didn't even know they made HT PJ's until I saw it here, and then after reading Art's glowing review bought one. Now I have Acer 9500 pom poms, at least for now!

In analog, processing the delays are much harder to implement. The processing occurs in continuous real-time. However there can be a combination of digital processing, then analog, then a third stage when the analog is converted back to digital.

But what there is more. There are actually three analog VGA inputs over two physical ports:
1) VGA Analog - PC Signal
2) VGA Analog - Extended Wide timing
3) VGA Analog - Component Signal

Also included in this special offer (is a pair of steak knives to those how buy within the next five minutes) is a DVI input:
4) DVI - Extended Wide timing

Now, of course, everyone understands that the above inputs are for 2D only.
3D must go through the HDMI port:
5) HDMI - 1.4a 3D Timing

Mike try to let us know your findings by next Christmas. I'd compare DVI-DVI to HDMI-HDMI first.
The D/A converters in Nvidia/AMD video cards are usually first rate. The VGA cable length can also affect picture quality.
I'd look at Monoprice.com to purchase.

Just saying!

Sorry coderguy if I mis quoted you?..but I have heard that distinction from many threads and I might have put two and two together and gave you full credit

This is my personal observation...I found in DLP you can see the pixels clearly ( like my LCD tv) and I can cleary see the screen door effect ( very obvious on 720 p hd66 and much better on 1080 hd33 or 9500)... But on my 3010 I can't see individual pixels unless I am very close

Initially I thought this is a serious drawback until I started noticing that this results in a uniform image on LCD that looks more film like to me than DLP....this could be an artifact of less than perfect convergence of LCDs but it works very well in its favor !

Many sources which showed noisy images on DLP's look smooth and natural looking ion LCD.....for example I have been watching many SD DVDs from local library and my own collection and they look stunning on LCD with uniform image without any pixelation or low resolution artifacts you typically expect to see on SD sources ( which I saw on DLP )

Now please leave something on the table or us LCD fans to brag about....you have "DLP POP, zero-crisstalk" to brag about, please done steal even the "FILM-like-look" also form us

No big deal, but the pixels are more visible on an LCD than a DLP in modern projectors other than focus issues or convergence blur.
This is not a subjective topic but is the result of a 80%+ pixel fill vs. a 60%+ pixel fill, and the D9 panels do curve the pixel fill ratio a bit higher than before but it is not enough to get to DLP or LCOS levels.

How much noise is in an image is very projector specific these days more than tech specific. A $1000 Mitsubishi hc4000 has slightly less noise in the image than a $3000 JVC LCOS. Depending on the type of scene, I found a Sanyo z4000 to be halfway between the JVC and Mits hc4000 for noise, but sometimes the JVC will show less, and I'd put the Epson 8350 about in the same spot, halfway between. The JVC has sophisticated noise reduction which cleans the image up though without too much of a side effect, more sophisticated than most projectors so it balances out in the end.

On some cheaper DLP's, they tend to be a tad bit noisier sometimes (the Benq's for instance or even a Viewsonic), but overall it really depends on the scene and the specific projector. Some projectors will show more noise in one scene and less in another, it also depends on gamma calibration, source content, and so many other factors. Overall though the cleanest image I have ever seen without a lot of NOISE REDUCTION enabled was still from a Mits hc4000, and that is saying something since I don't own this projector anymore and now watch a JVC RS-45 as my main unit.

The LCOS projectors have the least visible pixel fill, with the RS-55 and Sony 4K projectors beating them all at this due to the e-shift and 4k resolutions.

I have seen the 3010 and it wasn't bad, but I am a DLP fan in this price range.

To put things into perspective I'm posting convergence/sharpness test patterns for several projectors. Thanks go to Cine4Home.de

The Sim2 C3X is a very expensive 3 chip DLP projector with quality glass optics. We use it as a reference.

Note the Acer does better than any of the other projectors. As Mike is "just sayin" these picture should put things into the proper perspective: the Acer is indeed sweet!

Sim2 C3X:

---
Acer 9500:

---
Sony HW30:

---
Mitsubishi HC9000:

---
JVC x70/90:

---
Epson 3010:

---

Panasonic 5000/7000:

No RBE, an image that is easier on the eyes, pixel fill a non-issue from most seating distances, Epson customer service is probably better than Acer... Better placement flexibility (not much on the 3010, but I mean on other LCD's in general)... Better calibration controls, better CMS.

Those are your arguing points. For me closeups of faces LCD does very well at vs. DLP, it is mostly bright scenery and nature shots where LCD gets behind. Sometimes I have sworn at least a couple times I saw an LCD beat a DLP at POP. LCOS is probably the best balance between the two if you get a very sharp unit like my JVC RS-45 is, it is very close to DLP in scenery shots and also has good POP in skin tones. LCD is more inconsistent and edgier, but can also do good in some scenes. It really just depends on the scene more than anything else. I've never seen a projector win in an entire movie for every scene vs. another, not yet anyhow, maybe a $10,000 one.

Also in many price ranges LCD beats DLP in black levels (most price ranges), but the Acer just seems to be unusually strong here for a DLP in this price range, perhaps the strongest ever under $2000 (it would be interesting to see a Benq w6000's IRIS vs. an Acer's IRIS though). We know the Infocus sp8602, Runco's, a few older Sharps (not z-series), and some other projectors can clobber all these projectors at contrast, but I am speaking in this price range.

Wow that is incredible!

What is going on with the Acer 9500's sharpness adjustment. Stock settings, for example Movie sharpness is set at 14 out of 15 max! On other settings its between 12 and 14. Normally levels this high would introduce ringing but here they do not! On the other hand, a sharpness setting of +1 on my Oppo 93 which is supposed to have great video processing does introduce a halo around text. There is something different going on with the sharpness control on the Acer 9500. Reducing sharpness to anything less than around 10 gives a very soft looking image.

I would also add one other point about the Acer that people need to be aware of (but don't freak out about), I saw a review on Amazon or somewhere where the guy got one with a defective lens assembly, the guy owned another Acer DLP and said the 9500bd was not nearly as sharp. This scared me in combination with the HDMI issue, but now the poster updated the review and said his first Acer 9500bd was defective (not just VGA/HDMI thing), but actually defective in the optics across the board, and that his new replacement was as sharp as his other DLP.

The point of the story is on these lower-end projectors that are overloaded with features like the Acer is, you gotta be careful about testing the unit and QC even though it is a DLP, so do not always assume the problem is just with the model, but could be you got a defective lens assembly.

My friend had a defective lens assembly on one DLP once, and it made the CA ridiculously large like 2.5 pixels. Defective assemblies are not that common with DLP's, but it can crop up now and then.

The Acer one is not to same scale as others....not saying its not sharpest....but it would have been nice to see all of them looking at exact same portion of the pattern with exact same scale