or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › RED 4K 3D laser projector = $10K
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RED 4K 3D laser projector = $10K - Page 11

post #301 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post

Ok, if my math is correct: 24' wide, 2.0 gain, scope screen, which Jim said they were getting 24ftL off of, that would mean the PJ was pushing out about 2200+ lumens. What do you think? Lumens that shouldn't decrease much over time either. I'm ok with that!

That leaves the question of how bright is the $10k model for up to 15' screens.
post #302 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by tn1krr View Post

I agree with most of what you put above and I bet most others do too. The problem is the silver screen in 2D and the that it will not provide (nearly) as good 2D picture quality as a white high quality screen with a gain not much greater than 1. If anything, a high lumen 4K 2D projector should be matched with a lambertian diffuser screen without any gain layer to get just this uber high resolution without any visible sheen/sparkier that are present with anything with a gain layer. So in order to enjoy the superb 3D this new PJ potentially provides one must be willing to take a step or two backwards with an aspect of 2D quality or complicate the HT setup (dual AT screen would be a pain) a lot with a dual screen.

Fully automated dual screen, like Stewart Daily Dual, costs more than this Red Projector does, takes space (for example I just do not have room for one) and even then one of the screens is a roller that is prone to developing screen inperfections. I've yet to see a few years old roller screen that has remained perfect to my critical eye.

Great point! I didn't think about that negative. Really sounds like Red needs to provide an Active 3D solution or this PJ won't really fly in the home environment. It's doubtful that many will want to deal with changing screens and the inferior 2D or the hassle/expense of dual screens. Of course, some will deal with the Silver Screen or only use it for 2D, but not me.

Guess I'm going to go with an Epson and wait for the dust to settle.
post #303 of 768
I'm all for a 4k laser projector for $10k. I bought a $8k JVC RS55 for just 2D. I don't really care for 3D that much. It would be great if they made one that didn't do 3D for less.
post #304 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

I'm all for a 4k laser projector for $10k. I bought a $8k JVC RS55 for just 2D. I don't really care for 3D that much. It would be great if they made one that didn't do 3D for less.

Pretty soon a projector without 3D is going to be as hard to find as a new car without air conditioning...and as difficult to sell as a car without air conditioning.
post #305 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenjw View Post


Great point! I didn't think about that negative. Really sounds like Red needs to provide an Active 3D solution or this PJ won't really fly in the home environment. It's doubtful that many will want to deal with changing screens and the inferior 2D or the hassle/expense of dual screens. Of course, some will deal with the Silver Screen or only use it for 2D, but not me.

Guess I'm going to go with an Epson and wait for the dust to settle.

There are passive 3d solutions that do not require a silver screen. Passive is the better overall solution in my opinion. If they can produce enough lumens a filtered solution like motorman's would be ideal.
post #306 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post

Yes, but the benq uses a phosphor wheel, which decays over time. That is probably causing most of the light loss. Hopefully the RedRay does not.

Well, so do the Casio's and those last a lot longer, and decay isn't as steep as Benq's 30%.
post #307 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

That leaves the question of how bright is the $10k model for up to 15' screens.

2000-2500 lumens is mentioned in the various reports. Remember 4k PP is REDs primary target market for this machine. Essential part of the RED workflow, and till now only available at prices the same or higher than the RED cameras themselves.
post #308 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondaedg View Post

There are passive 3d solutions that do not require a silver screen. Passive is the better overall solution in my opinion. If they can produce enough lumens a filtered solution like motorman's would be ideal.

My understanding is that motorman's optic filters require two projectors, or I guess enough lumens to handle the filtered light reduction. Don't think the 2000-2500 estimates are enough, but maybe. Do we even know if these two solutions will work together?
post #309 of 768
Jim Jannard has had nothing but negative thoughts on active 3D, so don't expect it to ever happen.
post #310 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenjw View Post


My understanding is that motorman's optic filters require two projectors, or I guess enough lumens to handle the filtered light reduction. Don't think the 2000-2500 estimates are enough, but maybe. Do we even know if these two solutions will work together?

I believe the reason for dual projectors is to prevent the vertical resolution loss. With 4k, that shouldn't be a problem.
post #311 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondaedg View Post

I believe the reason for dual projectors is to prevent the vertical resolution loss. With 4k, that shouldn't be a problem.

Not only that. The dual optical filters for polarized 3d needs two different light paths. Not sure how it can be achieved with only one light path. The other solution would be a rotating optical filter, alternating between left and right, a la color wheel.
post #312 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toshiro_Mifune View Post

Jim Jannard has had nothing but negative thoughts on active 3D, so don't expect it to ever happen.


I hope the market will dictate that active 3D as a second tier option should be added to the primary passive solution.
post #313 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

I hope the market will dictate that active 3D as a second tier option should be added to the primary passive solution.

I HOPE SO THAT TOO! !!!

Can be added as option or as an add -on
post #314 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by adude View Post

Not only that. The dual optical filters for polarized 3d needs two different light paths. Not sure how it can be achieved with only one light path. The other solution would be a rotating optical filter, alternating between left and right, a la color wheel.

No need for a mechanically rotating filter. The "Z-Filter" can electronically change polarity. This is the technology used by RealD for single projector 3D installations. In the case of RealD the projector operates at 144 Hz and with left and right images alternating, with opposite circular polarization, at that rate (i.e, 72 Hz per eye).
post #315 of 768
The RED demoed on a Stewart 5D screen. It is a 2D/3D combo screen of some sorts.
The demo at the show was 2K and possibly 8-bit. The final product will be 4K and 12-bit.
It seems like RED had a second light engine but didn´t have enough time to both install it and get it aligned.
RED will keep on showing the projector.

Some talk about color separtion and the could mean sequential color, but same time L+R eye 3D at 120Hz.

We need to know ballpark what kind of native contrast this projector will be capable of presenting.

Low(?) native contrast could be solved with a "greyscale" added part to the optical engine, not likely but perhaps that can be done.
post #316 of 768
In a response to a question about the noise level of the projector, Red's Stuart English had this to say.

"This question highlights one of the major advantages of the modular design we applied to the projector.

Traditional designs place the lamp in the projector head, it gets hot, and hence you need to put substantial cooling (fans) there too.

In our modular design, the "lamp" is in a rack mount chassis that can be located a considerable distance from the optical head.


So no "projection box" needed."
post #317 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toshiro_Mifune View Post

In a response to a question about the noise level of the projector, Red's Stuart English had this to say.

"This question highlights one of the major advantages of the modular design we applied to the projector.

Traditional designs place the lamp in the projector head, it gets hot, and hence you need to put substantial cooling (fans) there too.

In our modular design, the "lamp" is in a rack mount chassis that can be located a considerable distance from the optical head.


So no "projection box" needed."

Well, there goes ease of installation...

My guess is that they needed a louder cooling unit that wouldn't work in the same room as the "optical unit". I'll reserve judgment until I see it, but this does not sound good. Even worse is he's selling it as a "Feature".
post #318 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondaedg View Post

Well, there goes ease of installation...

My guess is that they needed a louder cooling unit that wouldn't work in the same room as the "optical unit". I'll reserve judgment until I see it, but this does not sound good. Even worse is he's selling it as a "Feature".



The lower box is the laser engine, I doubt it will be a huge problem and I actually think of it as a feature, HDI3D had a very similar setup and they kept the laser engine stacked with the projector
post #319 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondaedg View Post

Well, there goes ease of installation...

My guess is that they needed a louder cooling unit that wouldn't work in the same room as the "optical unit". I'll reserve judgment until I see it, but this does not sound good. Even worse is he's selling it as a "Feature".

I would say the opposite.
Very much more ease of installation with the light engine in a separate module that can be "stowed away" somewhere else.
It is just some fibre cables attached to the projector. Not any difference than the other cables that one have to connect to the projector.

Very much a Feature, in fact a "dream feature" I have hoped for in other projectors for a long time.
Only Projectiondesign have something similar, but for a conventional lamp house.

Makes cooling noise suppression much easier.

Lasers and LEDs needs very accurate temperatures to stay within their right color production.
post #320 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohlson View Post

The RED demoed on a Stewart 5D screen. It is a 2D/3D combo screen of some sorts.
The demo at the show was 2K and possibly 8-bit. The final product will be 4K and 12-bit.
It seems like RED had a second light engine but didn´t have enough time to both install it and get it aligned.
RED will keep on showing the projector.

Some talk about color separtion and the could mean sequential color, but same time L+R eye 3D at 120Hz.

We need to know ballpark what kind of native contrast this projector will be capable of presenting.

Low(?) native contrast could be solved with a "greyscale" added part to the optical engine, not likely but perhaps that can be done.

Low CR is a key requirement for Home Theaters especially for JVC users that have joined the Dark Side.

The Stewart 5D screen maybe a good compromise, but it's still a screen change for most. I'd be OK with that provided it wasn't too expensive. Hopefully other companies like DaLite and Carada will provide similar solutions, or this is going to add to total cost of a Red solution.
post #321 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Very much a Feature, in fact a "dream feature" I have hoped for in other projectors for a long time.

Agreed. The projector is the only source of noise in my room, with all the other kit stored outside of the cinema, and being able to remove it has indeed been a dream.
post #322 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenjw View Post

low cr is a key requirement for home theaters especially for jvc users that have joined the dark side.

*high* cr...?
post #323 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenjw View Post

Low CR is a key requirement for Home Theaters especially for JVC users that have joined the Dark Side.

The Stewart 5D screen maybe a good compromise, but it's still a screen change for most. I'd be OK with that provided it wasn't too expensive. Hopefully other companies like DaLite and Carada will provide similar solutions, or this is going to add to total cost of a Red solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post

*high* cr...?

I assume you intended to say high CR with low black levels.
post #324 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

I assume you intended to say high CR with low black levels.

Oh course I meant High CR. Given the context of my post (JVC), that should be obvious. I was replying to a post that also said Low Contrast (same mistake). And yes, LOW black floor, hopefully CRT-like, that's the Holy Grail that we're all hoping lasers will provide.
post #325 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

I'm all for a 4k laser projector for $10k. I bought a $8k JVC RS55 for just 2D. I don't really care for 3D that much. It would be great if they made one that didn't do 3D for less.

I really do care for 3D, but not having to wear glasses over my glasses. So whenever glasses free /artifact free 3D comes to town I'll sign up. Until then the 4K revolution, laser or otherwise, will not get my interest until
4K movies are being released since the improvements of 2K to 4K don't seem to be all that earth shattering unless you sit really close to the screen.
post #326 of 768
I've been tracking this thread together with the one at redusers with great interest. My Sharp xv-z10000U is still going strong after 9 years (!!), but is obviously getting long in the tooth. I've been holding off upgrading until something truly revolutionary comes along. This could be it. The Red is promising 4k, 4k passive 3D, high lumens, and no bulb all for less than $10K. We'll all have to wait to see if and how the production units deliver on this promise. But the initial reports on the beta unit sound pretty good. While I don't relish the thought of replacing my screen, I'd be willing to do it if everything else pans out and if the cost isn't too high.
post #327 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

That leaves the question of how bright is the $10k model for up to 15' screens.


Originally Posted by Jarred Land
You just add Laser boxes to go up in brightness or go up in size... modular.

From what I heard they were only able to get one laser engine running at NAB so it seems like the $10K version will go larger than 15' with a high gain screen like the Stewart 5D they used.

There have also been hints that RED will be offering a screen that matches the projector's polarization perfectly, if they do this I imagine it will be much cheaper than what we are seeing now for 2D/3D screens. In the end if they get the screen right so that it works well in 2D and keeps ghosting to a minimum in 3D it may be better than a spectral 3D solution.

Before this was announced they only way I was going to do a polarized setup was using two JVC's, the way JVC polarizes their projectors internally allows you to keep 80% of the light output in 3D (only for dual stack) So you may have less extinction but you get a much brighter 3D image even compared to Omega.
post #328 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlanzy View Post


I really do care for 3D, but not having to wear glasses over my glasses. So whenever glasses free /artifact free 3D comes to town I'll sign up. Until then the 4K revolution, laser or otherwise, will not get my interest until
4K movies are being released since the improvements of 2K to 4K don't seem to be all that earth shattering unless you sit really close to the screen.

To be honest, if it did 1080p only with the same features I would be in. Since it does 4K, I'm not keeping my JVC RS55, even if my JVC has a better picture. I can finally get the size screen that I always wanted.
post #329 of 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

To be honest, if it did 1080p only with the same features I would be in. Since it does 4K, I'm not keeping my JVC RS55, even if my JVC has a better picture. I can finally get the size screen that I always wanted.

I thought the RS55 brightness was quite respectable on larger screens say up to 8 foot wide without high gain screens. I guess if you're going the humongous screens then likely only the DLP 3 chippers will get you there and probably at 3-4x cost of the RED which hopefully will have the high lumens of those far more expensive units and ideally the black levels of the lcos tech.
post #330 of 768
So has it been established yet that the imaging technology is, in fact, LCOS?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › RED 4K 3D laser projector = $10K