or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › The Official Acer H9500BD Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Acer H9500BD Thread - Page 133

post #3961 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontalLobotomy View Post

Hey all,
Currently have a Mits HD1000u (5+ years old) and have been looking forward to an upgrade for months now (waiting for the bonus at my new job, which just came through). So, I lined up the latest and greatest and started reading this thread. Days later I think I've gotten through about 40%. (Has it only been a few days? seems like a lot longer. These threads take on a a life of there own.)
The H9500BD seems like the best of the entry level 3D projectors, but, of course, a few questions:
5. If anyone has migrated from Mits HD1000u to Acer. What can I expect? Will I miss anything and will the overall improvement make me forget about what I miss?

I have a Mits HD1000u as well and am also considering an upgrade to the Acer. I have been following this thread since it started and have been waiting for the new firmware to get sorted out – which it has finally.

I have also looked at a number of other projectors in the general price range of the H9500 and something else to consider when moving from the HD1000u is placement. The Mits has a large vertical offset so you have to place the projector well below or well above your screen. For example, I have my Mits ceiling mounted in our family room. The room has a high vaulted ceiling and so the projector hangs on a pole.

Most of the other projectors have much less vertical offset. Even those with vertical lens shift would require me to use the extreme of the lens shift to match the offset of the Mits. So most other projectors out there will not work in my situation *unless* I can move the projector farther down using a longer pole or move the screen farther up.

Neither of those is very appealing to me. The lower the PJ is the more it sticks out and looks ugly in the room with all the open space above it. And to move the screen up any further puts the image too high for comfortable viewing from our couches.

Soooo…the Acer with its large offset (though not as large as the Mits) and vertical lens shift is one of the few projectors that will work for me and has all the features for a good price.

All that to say make sure that whatever projector you end up getting will work for you when upgrading from the HD1000u. You may end up needing to mount the PJ differently and/or move your screen.

Coderguy’s calculator is very helpful in figuring our placement: http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com
post #3962 of 4744
My 9500 arrived at ACER Repair Center today ~11:00am and I included a written request to update the firmware. (Yes, I had received a Case ID#, etc.) Are you aware of any situation in which they did not update the firmware when the 9500 projector was returned to them for service?
post #3963 of 4744
NHHT:Don't worry, they will.
Yesterday I received my projector for Acer repair center, I confirm the video is sharper, but I start to have some problem that I didn't had before, like when I trying to switch in 3d mode it's says, input 1920:1225 not 1920:1080 and screen just blank, I need try about 3-4 times before the 3d screen will appear, but with 1920;1225 SCREEN INPUT, weird...
P.S I think if you still have a chance to choose between Benq7000 or Acer 9500bd,
I think I will go for Benq if the price about the same, because Benq7000 in Hi-End projector section and Acer considered as entry-level
Edited by sars - 9/12/12 at 2:51pm
post #3964 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillRob View Post

I have a Mits HD1000u as well and am also considering an upgrade to the Acer. I have been following this thread since it started and have been waiting for the new firmware to get sorted out – which it has finally.
I have also looked at a number of other projectors in the general price range of the H9500 and something else to consider when moving from the HD1000u is placement. The Mits has a large vertical offset so you have to place the projector well below or well above your screen. For example, I have my Mits ceiling mounted in our family room. The room has a high vaulted ceiling and so the projector hangs on a pole.
Most of the other projectors have much less vertical offset. Even those with vertical lens shift would require me to use the extreme of the lens shift to match the offset of the Mits. So most other projectors out there will not work in my situation *unless* I can move the projector farther down using a longer pole or move the screen farther up.
Neither of those is very appealing to me. The lower the PJ is the more it sticks out and looks ugly in the room with all the open space above it. And to move the screen up any further puts the image too high for comfortable viewing from our couches.
Soooo…the Acer with its large offset (though not as large as the Mits) and vertical lens shift is one of the few projectors that will work for me and has all the features for a good price.
All that to say make sure that whatever projector you end up getting will work for you when upgrading from the HD1000u. You may end up needing to mount the PJ differently and/or move your screen.
Coderguy’s calculator is very helpful in figuring our placement: http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

The Acer does not have a huge vertical shift and I have found having the lens center about 3" above the top of the viewable area of the screen works best (ceiling mount). I find the projector at that height to be relatively innocuous. Be clear....check out the vertical shift of the Acer, the offset, and how it will work in your setup if you have any doubts (this is a general comment and not pointed specifically at you).
Edited by InCali - 9/12/12 at 3:19pm
post #3965 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by sars View Post

NHHT:Don't worry, they will.
Yesterday I received my projector for Acer repair center, I confirm the video is sharper, but I start to have some problem that I didn't had before, like when I trying to switch in 3d mode it's says, input 1920:1225 not 1920:1080 and screen just blank, I need try about 3-4 times before the 3d screen will appear, but with 1920;1225 SCREEN INPUT, weird...
P.S I think if you still have a chance to choose between Benq7000 or Acer 9500bd,
I think I will go for Benq if the price about the same, because Benq7000 in Hi-End projector section and Acer considered as entry-level

There are people on both sides of Acer v BenQ. Including some very knowledgeable people. That input issue is very odd. I'd call tech support and find out what's going on.
post #3966 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by sars View Post

NHHT:Don't worry, they will.
Yesterday I received my projector for Acer repair center, I confirm the video is sharper, but I start to have some problem that I didn't had before, like when I trying to switch in 3d mode it's says, input 1920:1225 not 1920:1080 and screen just blank, I need try about 3-4 times before the 3d screen will appear, but with 1920;1225 SCREEN INPUT, weird...
P.S I think if you still have a chance to choose between Benq7000 or Acer 9500bd,
I think I will go for Benq if the price about the same, because Benq7000 in Hi-End projector section and Acer considered as entry-level

I am receiving mine tomorrow after the update...
Fingers crossed on that strange resolution issue you mention...
post #3967 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by sars View Post

NHHT:Don't worry, they will.
Yesterday I received my projector for Acer repair center, I confirm the video is sharper, but I start to have some problem that I didn't had before, like when I trying to switch in 3d mode it's says, input 1920:1225 not 1920:1080 and screen just blank, I need try about 3-4 times before the 3d screen will appear, but with 1920;1225 SCREEN INPUT, weird...
P.S I think if you still have a chance to choose between Benq7000 or Acer 9500bd,
I think I will go for Benq if the price about the same, because Benq7000 in Hi-End projector section and Acer considered as entry-level

Just when I think I've narrowed down my choice, something else pops up. only $300 more on the street and available everywhere. I guess I'll have to research the Benq w7000 now. Hadn't even looked at it since the MSRP was way up there in the initial reviews I skimmed.
post #3968 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontalLobotomy View Post

Just when I think I've narrowed down my choice, something else pops up. only $300 more on the street and available everywhere. I guess I'll have to research the Benq w7000 now. Hadn't even looked at it since the MSRP was way up there in the initial reviews I skimmed.

I'm sure both are good choices,, but factor in the fact that the Acer comes with a pair of $70 glasses. Also, if NewEgg still has the 10% of the $1649 (don't know), that changes things too.

What's the street price of the BenQ now? I couldn't find it on Tiger, but saw it for 2K on Amazon. That puts it about $350 plus glasses above the Acer. Don't know if you would have to pay tax or not.
(Edit....I wouldn't worry too much about whether it is widely available. I'd focus on quality and price where I can get it)
post #3969 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by InCali View Post

The Acer does not have a huge vertical shift and I have found having the lens center about 3" above the top of the viewable area of the screen works best (ceiling mount). I find the projector at that height to be relatively innocuous. Be clear....check out the vertical shift of the Acer, the offset, and how it will work in your setup if you have any doubts (this is a general comment and not pointed specifically at you).

Thaks InCali. If Coderguy's numbers are fairly close I should be albe to mount the Acer only a couple of inches (at the most) below where my Mits is. I will have to use the vertical lens shift of the Acer but thankfully not the maximum. I may have to angle it a bit which would cause a tiny bit of keystoning but that would be absorbed into the screen border and not a big deal to me so I could live wiht that. smile.gif
post #3970 of 4744
forgot to mention I have a HTPC for input
post #3971 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillRob View Post

Thaks InCali. If Coderguy's numbers are fairly close I should be albe to mount the Acer only a couple of inches (at the most) below where my Mits is. I will have to use the vertical lens shift of the Acer but thankfully not the maximum. I may have to angle it a bit which would cause a tiny bit of keystoning but that would be absorbed into the screen border and not a big deal to me so I could live wiht that. smile.gif

I've become a master at mounting and adjusting the Acer and from everything I've seen, Coder's specs are dead on as far as distance, mounting, etc. Can't speak to light measurements.

Good luck.

Edit....out of curiosity, how far above the top of the viewable area of the screen would the middle of the lens be? Distance would probably be a factor in the amount of shift you would need?? In my addled state, I would think that the farther you are from the screen, the less shift you'd need. There was this Pythagoras guy who lived a long time ago.....
Edited by InCali - 9/12/12 at 5:57pm
post #3972 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by sars View Post

NHHT:Don't worry, they will.
Yesterday I received my projector for Acer repair center, I confirm the video is sharper, but I start to have some problem that I didn't had before, like when I trying to switch in 3d mode it's says, input 1920:1225 not 1920:1080 and screen just blank, I need try about 3-4 times before the 3d screen will appear, but with 1920;1225 SCREEN INPUT, weird...
P.S I think if you still have a chance to choose between Benq7000 or Acer 9500bd,
I think I will go for Benq if the price about the same, because Benq7000 in Hi-End projector section and Acer considered as entry-level
That is odd. I have the new firmware and have not had that 3D issue at all.

Now as for the Benq being in the "high end" section, yes, it is in that section for some goofy reason even though it never MSRPd in that section, you get my drift? I even posted in that thread/section that the projector had no business being in the high falootin plus $3k section but nobody saw fit to move it. The BenQ is not high end compared to the Acer and the Acer is not entry level either. The BenQ costs a bit more because of some features it has such as proper CMS with appropriate memory for calibration but reports also state it does not properly calibrate given that it is supposedly ISF certified. Not my words but reviewers. The Acer has yet to be properly calibrated with the new firmware but testers previously stated it was pretty close with what it came with. Now no user save setting is a PITA and I am not losing sleep trying to calibrate mine. Out of the box they both work well. One cost more than the other and you need to decide what that means to you as the Acer also does things the BenQ does not. Right back where we started eh?
post #3973 of 4744
Took a 3 week break from this forum, anyways I'm back to stir up the pot again...

If your not sensitive to RBE, I think the Acer is the better IMAGE for the price. It has better contrast and better black levels. I would own the Acer myself if it had a 6x color wheel, you can always use an HTPC to calibrate it properly (although admittedly I am so lazy I need to do this for my JVC RS-45 and still haven't, you gotta install a bunch of junk and then use the HTPC's bluray player, definitely not convenient, but it is an option). That said, the Benq might be significantly brighter for 3D and its CFI might be better.

The Benq has a full CMS and should calibrate well, reviewers always complain about the THX or Rec709 mode not being Rec709, but not one projector I've ever seen under $5000 has had that accurate of a Rec709 certified mode. In my calibration experience, the best OOTB images came from Sony and Mitsubishi (and Epson somewhat) as far as how things looked by eye. Furthermore, a lot of the reviewers are not really very understanding about how saturation errors and color gamut issues affect the picture as opposed to just getting a flat gray-scale. Sat tracking and gamut is huge, I can get my JVC at 6500k (not D65) but because the gamut is off, this means nothing and the picture is too yellow looking. Basically it means if you fix gray-scale but have a bunk gamut, then it doesn't fix the color, the color will still look off. I don't recall seeing the Acer's gamut + gray-scale, atlhough I think Krane did measure it, but it's hard to say just by looking at charts (so many variables), I can tell in person easier by eye playing reference level content and then measuring with my own meter and that gives me the best idea.

There are some really good calibrators that do reviews as well, but 80% of them seem to purposefully not mention these issues.
Edited by coderguy - 9/12/12 at 8:25pm
post #3974 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by InCali View Post

I want to do some light measurements and was looking through the test pages in the service menu. I'm not sure the test page is the same one described by Coderguy on post 3436.
Does anyone know?

It is probably 100 IRE, but it might not be (could be bugged, wouldn't be the first time). However, we all just use the patterns from the AVS test disc.

Since the free AVS Rec 709 test disk did not work for you, then you can buy a test disk like Digital Video Essentials Bluray or Spears and Munsil, they both have the IRE patterns. You might not want to spend any money though. To get the IRE signals, you either use a video signal generator (kind of pricey) or a bluray that displays a the gray scale patterns and indicates the IRE for each level. One such disc is DIgital Video Essentials, available from Amazon.com

IRE is the brightness level signal voltage, basically 100 = highest voltage which is pure white. The voltage representation actually only applied to analog devices, but we continue using the IRE term in digital devices due to convenience and because the end-result pattern is the same. Absolute black will be 0 IRE but you have to get the contrast and brightness setup with a pluge pattern first before you start assuming your black level is correct (remember brightness is black level, contrast is white level, gamma is basically everything between so that images have the appropriate detail and no crush).

Just think of IRE like this, 100 = pure white or 255,255,255 in RGB, and 0 = pure black or 0,0,0 in RGB. Everything between is grays, like 50,50,50 in RGB. You'll notice how to get a TRUE gray in RGB that you need equal amounts of each color, that is because all colors overlapped produce white or shades of gray (we discussed this earlier), and it is because white even in real life such as outside is actually all the colors of the spectrum combined.
post #3975 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillRob View Post

Thaks InCali. If Coderguy's numbers are fairly close I should be albe to mount the Acer only a couple of inches (at the most) below where my Mits is. I will have to use the vertical lens shift of the Acer but thankfully not the maximum. I may have to angle it a bit which would cause a tiny bit of keystoning but that would be absorbed into the screen border and not a big deal to me so I could live wiht that. smile.gif

Just be a bit careful on the vertical shift. I have 12" mount that brings the lens at 15" from ceiling. The viewable top of my existing screen is about 18-19". Throw distance is 13.5 ft.
I was planning to change my screen from 91" to 110" and while testing for that I noticed that I can not shift the lens up anymore. It does go down substantially, but I am maxed out on the upward shift.
If I check the coderguy's calculator, it does tell me that I should be able to move up. But physically it is not so.
I have already PMed coderguy but I have not seen a response yet.
post #3976 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Took a 3 week break from this forum, anyways I'm back to stir up the pot again...
If your not sensitive to RBE, I think the Acer is the better IMAGE for the price. It has better contrast and better black levels. I would own the Acer myself if it had a 6x color wheel, you can always use an HTPC to calibrate it properly (although admittedly I am so lazy I need to do this for my JVC RS-45 and still haven't, you gotta install a bunch of junk and then use the HTPC's bluray player, definitely not convenient, but it is an option). That said, the Benq might be significantly brighter for 3D and its CFI might be better.
The Benq has a full CMS and should calibrate well, reviewers always complain about the THX or Rec709 mode not being Rec709, but not one projector I've ever seen under $5000 has had that accurate of a Rec709 certified mode. In my calibration experience, the best OOTB images came from Sony and Mitsubishi (and Epson somewhat) as far as how things looked by eye. Furthermore, a lot of the reviewers are not really very understanding about how saturation errors and color gamut issues affect the picture as opposed to just getting a flat gray-scale. Sat tracking and gamut is huge, I can get my JVC at 6500k (not D65) but because the gamut is off, this means nothing and the picture is too yellow looking. Basically it means if you fix gray-scale but have a bunk gamut, then it doesn't fix the color, the color will still look off. I don't recall seeing the Acer's gamut + gray-scale, atlhough I think Krane did measure it, but it's hard to say just by looking at charts (so many variables), I can tell in person easier by eye playing reference level content and then measuring with my own meter and that gives me the best idea.
There are some really good calibrators that do reviews as well, but 80% of them seem to purposefully not mention these issues.

Ah. I just noticed your post. Could you please check my PM?
post #3977 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

... you can always use an HTPC to calibrate it properly (although admittedly I am so lazy I need to do this for my JVC RS-45 and still haven't, you gotta install a bunch of junk and then use the HTPC's bluray player, definitely not convenient, but it is an option)......
Can you elaborate on what is needed for the HTPC calibration because admittedly I too am too lazy to look it up. I am sure my PC has the oats to do this but not so sure what else is needed. Again, too busy or lazy to look it up what with all my warranty issues on other equipment. Can you give me the quick down and dirty or a link? Thanks.
post #3978 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

That said, the Benq might be significantly brighter for 3D and its CFI might be better.

The Benq has a full CMS and should calibrate well

The BQ calibrates fine, easier than the JVC.

it's been a long time, but i'd still like to see the 2D and 3D lumen measurements from the 9500 from several owners.

These 3D brightness comments from PC and Art were pre-firmware update. Were there any noticeable changes after the update?

"More puzzling is that the projector's 3D mode is not as bright as any of its other modes. In fact, 3D mode is the dimmest preset available, at 689 lumens on our test sample. Since many people buy their 3D projectors based on brightness, this is an important point and worth mentioning."

Unfortunately, the Acer seems to lose more brightness when switching to its one 3D mode, than any of the other 3D projectors.

We know the W7000 is 1500 @ D65 and ~1100 in 3D mode. I have JC's 3D test demo ISO file that has a 100% IRE screen in frame packed mode for a true measurement of 3D brightness off the screen.

If one of the 9500 owners has an HTPC, I can send them the download to the 3D test so we can get some 3D lumen measurements.
Edited by zombie10k - 9/12/12 at 9:00pm
post #3979 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaranddeeman View Post

Just be a bit careful on the vertical shift. I have 12" mount that brings the lens at 15" from ceiling. The viewable top of my existing screen is about 18-19". Throw distance is 13.5 ft.
I was planning to change my screen from 91" to 110" and while testing for that I noticed that I can not shift the lens up anymore. It does go down substantially, but I am maxed out on the upward shift.
If I check the coderguy's calculator, it does tell me that I should be able to move up. But physically it is not so.
I have already PMed coderguy but I have not seen a response yet.
I posted about this a long time ago when I got the 9500. 3" is the minimum and it only goes one way. It is also very limited and gets more limited when you shift left or right. It is nowhere near as robust as my Epson 8350 which is another animal altogether.
post #3980 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

The BQ calibrates fine, easier than the JVC.
it's been a long time, but i'd still like to see the 2D and 3D lumen measurements from the 9500 from several owners.
These 3D brightness comments from PC and Art were pre-firmware update. Were there any noticeable changes after the update?
"More puzzling is that the projector's 3D mode is not as bright as any of its other modes. In fact, 3D mode is the dimmest preset available, at 689 lumens on our test sample. Since many people buy their 3D projectors based on brightness, this is an important point and worth mentioning."
Unfortunately, the Acer seems to lose more brightness when switching to its one 3D mode, than any of the other 3D projectors.
We know the W7000 is 1500 @ D65 and ~1100 in 3D mode. I have JC's 3D test demo ISO file that has a 100% IRE screen in frame packed mode for a true measurement of 3D brightness off the screen.
If one of the 9500 owners has an HTPC, I can send them the download to the 3D test so we can get some 3D lumen measurements.
There is a brightness adjustment in 3D with the new FW but frankly I believe it was there before. I would be willing to help but do not feel like shelling out a bunch of cash for a meter because with the goofy user setting save problem I would constantly be editing user after calibrating because it resets everything every time you change anything in any viewing mode. What do you suggest because I am game?

Let's not forget that in certain modes the unit is very close to D65 with a few adjustments in factory settings according to reviews. We may not be able to do better even with some CMS capability and the user save is too big a PITA anyways.
post #3981 of 4744
An inexpensive $23 light meter will do the trick. I like having one just to check on the lamps once in a while.

The AVS Calibration disk has the 100% IRE screens for measuring 2D mode, and I can provide the 3D measurement iso if anyone is interested.
post #3982 of 4744
Very well. PM me the instructions and equipment (where to get) and I will be happy to oblige.

Edit: OK see the link to the meter.smile.gif I will get back to you on the 3D ISO files.
Edited by Mikes2cents - 9/13/12 at 6:13am
post #3983 of 4744
Projectors drift on gray-scale, and the gamut and gray-scale is sort of tied together into a calibration relationship as well as the lumens you get out of the image (some PJ's more than others). Other than a couple PJ's when using a new lamp, I haven't yet seen a projector that cannot be improved with a CMS (unless the CMS was bugged) and full gray-scale controls (CMS is separate from gray-scale, CMS is for the gamut). However, on DLP's the relationship remains more constant than on LCOS and LCD projectors as a general rule of thumb from the PJ's I've calibrated at least, so I cannot say for sure that the Acer doesn't stay close. DLP's definitely hold their calibrations better than other PJ's I've seen. I don't trust the calibration data from most reviewers (some are more trustworthy than others).

There are programs like yCMS and a bunch of others, I have not tried them. Some people have gotten good results with them potentially. Also, gray-scale and gamut can fight each other and mix in for bad results, a dirty gray-scale (farther off) can even look better in some cases when it is fighting against a bad gamut. Gray-scale and gamut are completely separate in their purposes (gray-scale is to remove color from blacks and whites and grays to make them neutral, whereas gamut is to set colors to their reference starting points so to speak), but if the gamut is off bad enough you can as a measure of desperation distort the gray-scale to try to fight certain things (very hard to do though). Calibration is fairly simple if you are working with a projector that calibrates easily (ouch --- just got bit by another West Nile Mosquito while at my comp desk), but where calibration gets complex is finding the correct concessions when a projector does not calibrate properly (like the JVC RS-45).

One reason this stuff gets so complicated is because most colors in most images are made up of some color dithering, so like a dirty gray scale at the higher IRE's might affect brighter dull colors more, but overall the gray-scale actually affects MANY colors in images even though it is meant to adjust black and white to a neutral state. The gamut however also pretty much affects most colors for the same reason even if you just have ONE or TWO colors off, but not always to the point of being visible. For instance if you were looking at a "blood-red" sunset over a lake, obviously the RED gamut controls (Hue, Sat, Lum) are going to have more affect then the other colors, but on the fringes where more dithering exists you can still notice the effects of some other colors being off as well (especially if they are near RED or maybe a secondary color). So it's hard to say sometimes what really affects what exactly. I have seen many calibrators put it into mathematical terms, but for various reasons I don't trust a lot of the math (it's too 3-dimensional and based on multivariate derivatives if you were really going to try to solve the problems). Certainly there are some basic math principles to follow when calibrating, but there are just so many variables when a near-perfect calibration cannot be achieved, that eventually sometimes you have to let your eye confirm the concessions you need to make, regardless of what the meter is telling you.
Edited by coderguy - 9/12/12 at 10:45pm
post #3984 of 4744
So what about input lag with the new firmware?
post #3985 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilya Volk View Post

So what about input lag with the new firmware?

I don't believe anyone has reported testing it and none of the feedback from Acer suggested that it would be different.
post #3986 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by InCali View Post

I've become a master at mounting and adjusting the Acer and from everything I've seen, Coder's specs are dead on as far as distance, mounting, etc. Can't speak to light measurements.
Good luck.
Edit....out of curiosity, how far above the top of the viewable area of the screen would the middle of the lens be? Distance would probably be a factor in the amount of shift you would need?? In my addled state, I would think that the farther you are from the screen, the less shift you'd need. There was this Pythagoras guy who lived a long time ago.....

With my current setup there is.5 inches from the top of the viewable area of the screen to the middle of the lens. And from the lens to the screen surface is 10.5 feet.
post #3987 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaranddeeman View Post

Just be a bit careful on the vertical shift. I have 12" mount that brings the lens at 15" from ceiling. The viewable top of my existing screen is about 18-19". Throw distance is 13.5 ft.
I was planning to change my screen from 91" to 110" and while testing for that I noticed that I can not shift the lens up anymore. It does go down substantially, but I am maxed out on the upward shift.
If I check the coderguy's calculator, it does tell me that I should be able to move up. But physically it is not so.
I have already PMed coderguy but I have not seen a response yet.

With the vaulted ceiling in my room it's hard for me to get meaningful measurements from the ceiling because there are different heights where the PJ and the screen are. But (as I replied above) the middle of the lens on my HD100u sits 11.5 inches above the top of the viewable area of the screen. From what you wrote my 11.5” compares to 3-4” on your setup.

So when you say that the lens shift “goes down substantially” do you mean that you can shift the projected image downward on the wall so as to increase the vertical distance between the lens and the top of the screen (projector inverted of course)?

If that is the case then that is what I want. I want to be able to increase that vertical offset between lens and projected image to at least 8 inches. I can extend my mount pole a bit and/or angle the PJ slightly downward to make up the difference.

Do I have my thinking straight on this?
post #3988 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillRob View Post

With my current setup there is.5 inches from the top of the viewable area of the screen to the middle of the lens. And from the lens to the screen surface is 10.5 feet.

At 10.5 feet with full zoom, the picture size will be about 93". The height is fine. If you want a bigger picture, you'll have to move back some. Coder's calculator is pretty accurate (or was with my PJ) in this regard.
post #3989 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

How big is the screen, the screen size (specifically screen height) is what determines vertical offset and lens shift amount.
If the Acer has a more off-balance vertical lens shift control, then I'll have to re-enter all the numbers into my calculator. None of the reviewers said it did, but I have not had anyone measure it exactly and report back to me. Projector calculators are generally just a guideline as there are also MFR tolerances and errors in the default specs that can vary slightly between units (but usually not more than an inch or two). I used the numbers provided by the manual and read all the reviews in an attempt to get the lens shift values correct. Do note that my calculator does have a graphical bug (it shows the projector in the wrong position sometimes graphically, but do not look at the graphics, look at the OFFSET value)...
If someone wants to precisely measure this and is confident in their abilities to understand lens shift and confident they have the projector perfectly level (with zero PJ tilt), then I can update the calculator with corrected numbers. I did look at aaranddeeman PM he sent me, but I need exact measurements to know for sure.

I can give it a shot to provide you with the measurements. Let me know what all you need. I will try my best..
post #3990 of 4744
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillRob View Post

With the vaulted ceiling in my room it's hard for me to get meaningful measurements from the ceiling because there are different heights where the PJ and the screen are. But (as I replied above) the middle of the lens on my HD100u sits 11.5 inches above the top of the viewable area of the screen. From what you wrote my 11.5” compares to 3-4” on your setup.
So when you say that the lens shift “goes down substantially” do you mean that you can shift the projected image downward on the wall so as to increase the vertical distance between the lens and the top of the screen (projector inverted of course)?
If that is the case then that is what I want. I want to be able to increase that vertical offset between lens and projected image to at least 8 inches. I can extend my mount pole a bit and/or angle the PJ slightly downward to make up the difference.
Do I have my thinking straight on this?

You can do relative measurements. I have a vaulted ceiling also. I just use a specific height (20" or so above the top of the viewable area of the screen) and use that as the room height. Did you say the lens is 11.5" above or .5"?? There seems to be a discrepancy in your two posts. I'd try to get it as close to a 3" offset as possible, but you should be okay. From memory, I believe I had a fair amount of downward adjustment. You should not have to (or want to) tilt the projector. That'll just introduce vertical keystoning (why adjust it if you don't have to??). I actually use the side to side swiveling of my projector to deal with horizontal keystoning when I mount the projector. If I notice a slight keystone effect, I just twist the PJ a little bit to one side until the effect goes away and then use the horizontal adjustment to center the picture. That basically ensures that my PJ is square to the screen from a "side to side" perspective (I think....) Ditto for vertical. I'd rather use the Horizontal and Vertical adjustments to center the picture if possible rather than tilting or swiveling.

Edit...I use "baby" adjustments of tilting or swiveling the PJ to fine tune centering the picture.....1/2" or so....rather than the Horizontal and Vertical adjustments as they don't do a good job of making minute changes. A change of that nature doesn't really affect keystone. So, I swivel/tilt to get rid of keystone, then H/V adjustments to get close, and then fine tune centering by tweaking the tilt/swiveling of the projector......hope that's clearer than I think it is......
Edited by InCali - 9/13/12 at 10:39am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › The Official Acer H9500BD Thread