or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Panamorph update - April 24
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Panamorph update - April 24  

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
The mold manufacturer is continuing their efforts to deliver quality parts. Their program manager is obviously trying to put things back on track, but he has still to provide a detailed program plan of when things are going to get done. I am anticipating a full set of parts sometime (?) in the near future. However, due to the past I'll be pleasantly surprised if they meet a minimum quality level. It is definitely possible if they put in the necessary effort.

Meanwhile, the parallel design has been completed and is being programmed into the CNC machines to manufacturer Aluminum parts. Realistically, it will probably require a week of testing and tweaking to make sure the programs and operations are setup correctly before they go into production. However, there is a dedicated machine available for the project, so it's not as much a scheduling issue as it is just doing the work. Once the parts are fabricated they then have two finishing operations before they go to product assembly. In parallel, the alternate design requires difference glass components. However, even if our optics vendor is slow on this, I have quite a bit of raw material in hand to get going with a local operation. Consequently, the Aluminium parts are still the key. I'm still guessing that this alternative approach will win against the plastic approach, although the race is definitely still on.

Shawn Kelly
Cygnus Imaging
post #2 of 27
Sounds like things are moving ahead.
post #3 of 27
Thanks for the update, Shawn.

The more I think about it, the happier I am that Shawn and Cygnus are taking the time to make sure the best product possible, ships. Personally, I don't care that much about the cosmetic aspects, but build quality is critical. I'm glad that Shawn has set a standard that the manufacturers have to live up to.
post #4 of 27
Thanks Shawn - Keep up the good work - It'll be worth it in the end
It's good to have someone with your persistence and determination to get it done right, on the job-

post #5 of 27
How many, not yet paid customers are interested?
Suppose the lens will be for sale in the beginning of september, I would be interested, but how many more? 14? 22? 80?

What would be the price for a power buy and how much people as a minimum must be signed in?
post #6 of 27
In a prior life, I had a few occasions to work with plastic injection molders -- mostly creating wall thermostat cases -- generally smaller units than the panamorph, I expect. To keep the story short, things never never developed smoothly. Even with experienced diemakers, it was one thing after another before the parts were dimensionally correct, snapped together properly, etc. And only then, finally, they went back to have the "finish" applied. I decided that injection mold design was about 27% science -- the rest art and prayer. I'm not in the least surprised with the time frames you've encountered. In fact, I'd say you're right on schedule. It takes enormous futzing with chases, shrinkage, etc., till the result is right. The bigger the part, the longer it took.

Your guess that the machined aluminum will win the race is probably right. And unless your expecting to build thousands of these things, it's maybe the best way to go, period.
post #7 of 27
Shawn than you also for the continuos updates.
Will the machined aluminium panamorph be offered to the original buyers or at least given the choice? I personally prefer the sounds of a machined housing but others may desire the plastic injected version. Also and this has been asked but I cannot remember seeing an answer, will Cygnus be contacting those on the pre-orders regarding current mailing addresses etc, and what of insurance? Given the recent thread on FedEx's rather shifty insurance practices I am concerned as that is what I was billed for initially. After all my Panamorph will be winging it half way around the globe. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/eek.gif
post #8 of 27
One thing's for sure, with all the anticipation this thing's brought forth during all this delay, it has also created pretty high expectations! This baby is doomed at start to perform with the precision of a rocket indeed. And that can only mean good.

post #9 of 27
Sounds like your making progress, just to second JohnMP's sentiments, I will be moving house in one week, I was hoping to have a Panamorph by now but that obviously isn't going to happen so I will contact you when I have my new address. I this causes a problem then let me know.
post #10 of 27
Same here, when I ordered my panamorph I was just moving out of Mom and Dad's to go to college.

Now I'm moving into the Sandy Shore Retirement village next week, so I need to update my address...

(ok, so maybe that was a bit below the belt) http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

Lex MC1/Sunfire CG/Hales Rev3's x3/M&K SS150 tripoles/Quadscan/Plus UP1100/Homemade screen
post #11 of 27
post #12 of 27
Well another month has come and gone and it is time for another update. Hope to hear from Shawn soon and this time I am expecting one of the two methods to be ready for prime time.
post #13 of 27
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">...one of the two methods to be ready for prime time.</font>
That may be why we haven't heard from him yet this week. Shawn is pretty regular... No, let me rephrase that, Shawn provides us regular updates.

The button is labeled "Play", not "Pay". STOP the MPAA!
Our Silent Angels
post #14 of 27
Thanks Man E, I was thinking the same thing...


Our Home Theater - http://www.fatbulldog.com
post #15 of 27
Well, our baby is due May 15th....I was hoping to finish off the home
theater before the grand event. At this point though....

Stewart Greyhawk
Sony: SAT-B3, DTC-100,STR-DA777ES Receiver
Toshiba: SD-3109 DVD
Proscan 27" TV
B&W: DM601, CC6, DS6B, 800ASW speakers
post #16 of 27
I know this is a really basic queston but I'll ask it anyway:

How do I tell whether a panamorphic or anamorphic lens will work better for me?

Screen size: 16X9 Grayhawk ordering either 118, 108 or 96 inch wide

Projector approximately 18 ft to screen

JVC G11 with plans to build htpc with Radeon card

Seating area 11 ft to screen

Will be watching DVDs, hdtv and some 4X3 broadcast
post #17 of 27
ISCO II = same image height, 33% wider image.

ISCO II = shorter throw

Panamorph = same image width, 25% shorter image height.

Panamorph = longer throw

Here's an example. Let's say you have the projector bolted to the ceiling. Let's say you throw an image that is 8'x6' from your projector. With the ISCO II in front of the projector, you will have an image that is 10.64' x6' (1.33 x 8' = 10.64'). With the Panamorph, the image will be 8'x4.5' (6' x .75 = 4.5').

post #18 of 27
If I have an overkill throw, so I use my zoom on the projector to make the image smaller to fit the screen, but still zoom to spare, then it doe not really matter which lense you take does it?

Then the choice is which lens has the best cost to quality ratio?

and now it is too early to tell?

G11, htpc (AMD Thunderbird 850, Geforce2 GTS, 256 Sdram), Power DVD, thin bedsheet.

[This message has been edited by kyrill (edited 05-02-2001).]
post #19 of 27
Larry, I see that you have recently moved. Did you get the "shipment" from Shawn yet?

The button is labeled "Play", not "Pay". STOP the MPAA!
Our Silent Angels
post #20 of 27
Hi Man E,
Nope. I am still waiting for the fabled return of "El Pineapple Face". Supposedly, he will be the celebrity endorser for the lens, or as he calls it: "Supreme-Maximum Panamorphic Lens".
post #21 of 27

Currently I have my projector inset into the rear wall of my HT, and with the lens fully zoomed-out (ie. smallest possible image) it pretty well fills the far wall.

I would have to have the Panamorph rather than the ISCO II - to squeeze the height since I can't expand the width.

However if I understand what you mean by 'longer throw' I would zoom-in more - which I have plenty of capacity to do.

Have I got this right or wrong way around? Wrong way around, I'm stuffed!


post #22 of 27

I'm confused by your question. As you say that you are fully zoomed out (smallest image) - I would assume that fully zoomed out is the largest, though I could be wrong.

Anyway, the concept of the Panamorph or ISCO are simple and will depend on the distance from screen and size of image you will want.

The Panamorh will vertically compress the image, maintaining the top aligned to screen - in other words, squish the image from the floor up while keeping the top in the same spot (only if ceiling mounted).

The ISCO will horizontally expand the image from its current 4:3 size to a 16x9 size - pretty simple.

I personally couldn't use the ISCO because my smallest zoomed image does not get small enough to fit onto my 16x9 screen - slightly to large. This would create a 16x9 image that didn't fit the screen as well with the same amount of the image below the bottom of the screen. With the distance from the projector to the screen, I am in the middle of my zoom range when my image hits the sides of my 16x9 screen. This allows for the panamorph perfectly because it will then compress the 4:3 image up from the floor onto the screen where it belongs, while maintaining the width.

I hope this clears up your question.


Our Home Theater - http://www.fatbulldog.com
Last updated 5/25/01
post #23 of 27
Besides what Brian said/asked, I would add that the ISCO makes the image larger, the Panamorph makes it smaller. Here's an example: let's say you had a 4:3 image of 8'x6'. With the ISCO II, that image would become 10.6'x6' (1.33 x 8' = 10.64'). That same 8'x6' image would become 8'x4.5' (6' x .75 = 4.5'), with the Panamorph. So clearly, this lends itself to longer throws. With the ISCO, you end up with a much larger image than the Panamorph - assuming the 4:3 image on the lens is identical in size. For some people, they are forced to go with the ISCO, they have no choice. For others, it's the other way around. We are all hoping the Panamorph will beat the ISCO, so if you're locked into the Panamorph (and it sounds like it, from what you described), it's not the worst thing that could happen. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif
post #24 of 27
One correction to Brian's post - an inverted projector
with a Panamorph will not keep the top of the image at
the same level as it would be if the Panamorph were not

Use the calculator at the Cygnus Imaging website: http://www.cgns.com to figure out how much the top of the
image will drop.

For a ballpark figure - it will drop the level of the top
of the image about 5 inches for every 10 feet of throw.

post #25 of 27
Reminds me of the line in Total Recall - "Two Weeks...Two Weeks...Two Weeks..."


D-ILA, HTPC, HDTV, Panamorph(?)
post #26 of 27
Sorry to confuse everyone - I meant I was fully zoomed in, not out.

I know the effect on the image size and that I need to tilt the lens 4 degrees up to get the top aligned to where it currently is.

The problem is the throw dynamics are changed in a way I can't find accurately described ('longer throw' is a bit confusing to me). So the image will not be the same width as the existing image (and my existing screen) without changing the zoom of the projector lens.

Will I need to zoom out (good) or zoom in (bad, in fact impossible) to restore the image to its current width?

Thanks again for the help.
post #27 of 27
as I understand it, the Panamorph will not alter the current width of your projection, it will squeeze the height in such a way that current width : squeezed (new) height=16:9
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Panamorph update - April 24