Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn I don't mean to pick on you personally, but this is the common comment made my pro anamorphic lens people all the time that I don't understand.
if zooming displays a 1:1 pixel count as the source, is that not 100% of the detail available being shown? are there not better ways to simply upscale than to deal with the issues associated with the a-lens? I need to be about .25x the screen width to see pixel structure on a solid white image with my jvc x35. even if I didn't have good vision, i'd imagine you need to sit inside .5x screen width to see pixel structure. obviously we have different projectors, but maybe an A-lens is only needed for a projector with poor SDE?
I don't know, I just can't accept an extra 200lines of 'resolution' making up for the fact we no longer get 1:1 pixel mapping. I think a-lenses became unnecessary with the birth of the digital projector. i'll always take native over scaled resolutions.
These comments called the whole A lens position into question as well as my credibility. I don't need to a be ashamed of the fact that I has sufficient discretionary income to buy whatever I want for my theater and this affords me the opportunity to look objectively at what an ISCO III can do for the image. I therefore don't need to justify the purchase by still utilizing the lens if it wasn't providing a superior image in my system. The condescending tone of the poster about screen door and my comments just being typical A lens bias required my giving it back so to speak.
this will be the last comment I direct at you. sorry if I touched a nerve, that was never my intent. that was why I prefaced my post with "I don't mean to pick on you personally". you just happened to be the one that said the same thing i'd heard, and not understood/agreed with. if you like the extra brightness, I get that. if you had a projector that had bad SDE, I get that. but if neither or those are an issue, then a brighter, upscaled image isn't a huge deal. PLEASE NOTE, i'm saying IF, because I was trying to understand what potential advantages could be for some ppl.
for what it's worth, I have no idea who you are, what you do, or what your credibility is. so there's no way I could have intentionally called that into question. I never wanted it to be personal, I couldn't possibly make it personal because I don't know anything about you. i'm sorry that you took it personally, and i'm sorry that you interpreted my questions negatively.