or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Infocus IN72-IN74-IN76
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Infocus IN72-IN74-IN76 - Page 9

post #241 of 4267
1.6:1 is extremely popular with computers. Pretty much all Apple products are 1.6:1 now, including laptops, iMacs and displays. Though, from what I see, you're talking more like 1.67:1. Man, why can't we have one format for everything? Especially since computers are infinitely scalable.

Although, one wonders if you can get 1.6:1 or 1.67:1 screens......
post #242 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKB View Post

Hi Bob - just to clarify, are you saying the 48 vertical pixels not used will contain projected black? In other words, will there be light spill above and below the projected image?

We do not illuminate the extra rows of pixels to achieve the maximum brightness with the pixels that we are using.

If someone could enlighten me as to what the problem is I would appreciate it. There is so little content at 1.78:1 that black bars are going to happen whether or not the display is native 16:9. Also, I would certainly use a 16:9 screen with these products and let the border absorb the black pixel area. We have included imbedded test patterns for easy setup with such a screen.
post #243 of 4267
Bob, are the extra rows of pixels masked? If so then I wouldn't bother thinking about the digital shift feature.

I'm not certain as to what the problem is. With screen masking I'm not certain that I see spill on my crappy projector. With your black levels it really shouldn't be noticable.

In a related question: Will it support 1:1 pixel map at 1280x768 in case I want to hook my future Mac Book Pro to the projector? Or are we limited to 1280x720?

Nigel
post #244 of 4267
The new 0.65" 1280x768-chip has a faster controller chip than the HD2+ DMD so motion blur/panning artifacts should be reduced. Good new for those of us who dislike this. 4x colour wheel speed is not equally exciting though.

Bob: why the decrease in CW-speed from HD2+-projectors despite a faster controller chip? Is it only to differentiate these products from those with DC3 or are there other reasons?
post #245 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams View Post

We do not illuminate the extra rows of pixels to achieve the maximum brightness with the pixels that we are using.

If someone could enlighten me as to what the problem is I would appreciate it. There is so little content at 1.78:1 that black bars are going to happen whether or not the display is native 16:9. Also, I would certainly use a 16:9 screen with these products and let the border absorb the black pixel area. We have included imbedded test patterns for easy setup with such a screen.

Hi Bob - the concern (at least mine) was that I'd have to deal with light spill above and below my screen (on my wall) if I set up a 15:9 projector to completely fill my 16:9 screen. Sort of the same issue you face when using a 16:9 screen with a 4:3 projector, only with smaller letterbox bars.

If you have a traditional fixed screen from one of the well known screen manufacturers, then you probably don't care that you have 3" etc. of extra letterboxing, since your screen border will likely absorb it. But there's so many different types of screens, setups, and borders in use, and the extra spill may or may not make a difference to you. Maybe this is worrying about nothing, I don't know.

Take my setup for example - I have a 16:9 DIY screen with no border. I use felt to mask the screen for 2.35:1 material. If the projected image is 15:9, that means I have projected black on my screen wall above and below the screen, and above my 2.35:1 masking (see my Gallery). Now my screen wall is dark brown, so it probably won't be noticeable, or will it? I don't know - I'd rather not find out. Also, what if someone had my exact setup but had a white screen wall? The spill would probably be clearly visible then. Not a big deal for sure, and certainly addressable with a border or masking, but having a true 720p projector was one thing I found appealing about the IN76 vs the other offerings such as the HC3000, which AFAIK projects a 15:9 image.

At any rate, it looks like a moot point since it sounds like the 48 pixels will not have projected black, and for all intents and purposes, the IN76 is a true 16:9 projector.
post #246 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams View Post

We do not illuminate the extra rows of pixels to achieve the maximum brightness with the pixels that we are using.

If someone could enlighten me as to what the problem is I would appreciate it. There is so little content at 1.78:1 that black bars are going to happen whether or not the display is native 16:9. Also, I would certainly use a 16:9 screen with these products and let the border absorb the black pixel area. We have included imbedded test patterns for easy setup with such a screen.

I'm with you on the black bars. I don't think anyone cares about the pixels for movie watching.

The problem is that some applications (particularly games, especially older ones) don't support widescreen resolutions. But you'll be hard pressed to find a game that doesn't support 1024x768, which usually an acceptable fallback. Without those 48 pixels, we can't use 1024x768 in a pixel-mapped mode.

Is even within the realm of possibility that the remaining pixels could be enabled with a firmware update?
post #247 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by krasmuzik View Post

JeffKB

1280x768 (WXGA) is an envelope that covers 1024x768 XGA and 1280x720P HD - surely a biz projector using the chip will have a native biz mode to map the XGA directly and pillar box the edges - just as the HT projector is going to letterbox the chip.

Hi Kras,

If TI needed to do a "one-size-fits-none, we-only-want-to-make-1-chip-for-everybody-and-it-needs-to-cover-XGA-dammit" solution, then I would have been OK with a higher resolution 1366 x 768 true 16:9 chip!

The older Sony LCD projectors used that resolution and it seemed to work very well. Of course the problem with that thinking is that TI would never offer higher resolution in their cheap DC2 720p chip versus their higher end DC3 720p chip.

Anyway, my last post on the topic, I promise.
post #248 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by APranger View Post

I'm with you on the black bars. I don't think anyone cares about the pixels for movie watching.

Those pixels for movie watching are only relevant if you're an inch or so off in your installation and want to shift the image up or down 24 pixels.

I live with a tiny bit of keystoning because of that kind of scenario...my universal mount has a minimum height (unless flush which is too short) and my screen has a certain location its physically constrained to be. I'm off an inch or two offset wise. I suppose I could shim the screen off the wall.

My circumstance is likely rare but common enough that it might be handy if it could be cheaply implemented. Unfortunately for the IN76 this does not appear to be the case.

Nigel
post #249 of 4267
Slight different question: Is Infocus planning on a presentation projector based on this DMD?

I'm fairly certain the response will be: No comment.

Nigel
post #250 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by lungan71 View Post

The new 0.65" 1280x768-chip has a faster controller chip than the HD2+ DMD so motion blur/panning artifacts should be reduced. Good new for those of us who dislike this. 4x colour wheel speed is not equally exciting though.

Bob: why the decrease in CW-speed from HD2+-projectors despite a faster controller chip? Is it only to differentiate these products from those with DC3 or are there other reasons?

The lower the color wheel refresh, the higher the true bit depth and the less motion panning artifacts there are because the DLP device is on more of the time (fewer spokes to go through each frame). We do not currently have 5x wheels on any of our products.
post #251 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel_ht View Post

Slight different question: Is Infocus planning on a presentation projector based on this DMD?

I'm fairly certain the response will be: No comment.

Nigel

Maybe, and probably mask off 128 pixels on the sides to make it for business use only.
post #252 of 4267
It appears that the Mitsubishi HC3000 and Optoma HD72 are 4x also. But "IF" projector Central is right, the Sharp XV-Z3000 is 5x. It might be too early to be sure if thats correct information or not, I haven't seen that directly from Sharp, or Optoma actually.

I am also interested in the dual-iris on the sharp, wondering how well that works, since they are claiming 6500:1 contrast ratio. I found the Sharp Z-2000 to be a dependable line of Projectors, just doing what they are suppose to do, come on and always work. The price point seem to be kind of at a odd place for some people, but I think it was well built.

I'm wondering now though if Infocus will have another 720P model later this year. One that is higher end verses "value", to replace the 7210. That is what a Infocus dealer that I work together in some areas with, was told. I guess there is a price between the IN76 and their 1080P model, that would interest people.
post #253 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel_ht View Post

Slight different question: Is Infocus planning on a presentation projector based on this DMD?

I'm fairly certain the response will be: No comment.

Nigel

You are correct. To comment on our future product roadmap would risk me leaving this board forever. However, I will say that this Industrial Design was designed exclusively for home use so it would be unlikely that the form factor of such a projector would resemble this one.
post #254 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffKB View Post

Yikes, I must have missed that release, but if that's the reason why TI decided to go with a 15:9 chip then it still doesn't make any sense to me.

I thought the 1280 x 768 chip was considered to be native 16:10. That's what I gathered according to Optoma's released specs on the H72.
post #255 of 4267
Bob, thanks again. The info you have given us so far sounds great to me. The online PDF for the Play Big series is somewhat limited in what it reveals as far as the full feature set of these PJ's are concerned. Could you tell us how soon all the info on the features will be available for us to peruse ?
post #256 of 4267
I thought the Infocus X3 used this chip - is it only 1024x768 and not 1280x768?
post #257 of 4267
1280/768 = 1.67:1
post #258 of 4267
Quote:


We have included imbedded test patterns for easy setup with such a screen.


Ah, I like this. It took me a long time to dial my 4805 in just right.

Bob, any chance that we can add a custom start up screen in any of these new models? I used a program someone on this forum made to change the screen on my X1. It was nice to have a start-up picture of my girl and myself with "Welcome to Our Theater" on display. A nice touch for the HT. (And if you're really bothered that I tampered with the firmware, change "I" to "some guy I know". ) If not, could Infocus consider this option in future updates or products?

Thanks,
George
post #259 of 4267
Bob - could you comment on the lens/optics/focus mechanism of these new PJs versus the 4805. The brochure mentions 12 element, all glass, rack and pinion, etc.

Thanks!
Jeff
post #260 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams View Post

The lower the color wheel refresh, the higher the true bit depth and the less motion panning artifacts there are because the DLP device is on more of the time (fewer spokes to go through each frame). We do not currently have 5x wheels on any of our products.

Thank you for the reply but I'm not quite sure I follow you. Doesn't the SP72xx have 5x wheels or are you saying that products belonging in this subforum hasn't had 5x?

4x for NTSC would mean 240Hz color refresh, am I right? Could these pj's do 5x for PAL 50Hz? Or would PAL 50Hz be 200Hz color refresh?

I'm fairly CSP-sensitive and live in PAL-country so 4x for PAL probably rules out the IN76 for me.

Thanks in advance Bob!
post #261 of 4267
Can Infocus provide an ND2 filter of its own (or something similar) for these projectors? At 800 (~680 in low power, for the IN72) and 1000 (for the IN76) video optimized lumens, I imagine many people are going to complain about headaches from the eye strain (and possible rainbows).
post #262 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams View Post

I do not believe that this feature is on the development timeline. It required rewriting a significant portion of the software to implement because it would have changed the way our vertical image position control actually worked. We decided that the complexity of the job was not worth the effort compared to the rest of the features.

What about picture shift? Why can't Infocus include that feature for helping to bottom mask only?
post #263 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by krasmuzik View Post

Why would you make ND2 a standard accessory?

Since these new PJs have a recessed lens that is not threaded to accept the normal ND2 filters, I believe Ja Phule is asking if InFocus will be making a custom fitted filter for the projector. My guess is no.

Even though it may not look elegant when you're done, I'm sure with a little bit of tape and determination you could probably get a normal ND2 filter to work on these.
post #264 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by edwardr132 View Post

What about picture shift? Why can't Infocus include that feature for helping to bottom mask only?

The quote you referenced from Bob in your post IS his answer to why digital lens shift (i.e. picture shift) was not included...
post #265 of 4267
Quote:


Regarding the HDMI input, will it be possible to do a firmware update when the new HDMI 1.3 standard is released

Not too sure what all is new with 1.3, but I thought it only added new features in audio, how would this affect video?
post #266 of 4267
Santa Bob:

-How's the focus continuity across the screen compared with 4805 as base? Same? Better? Noticeably better? (Not sure if I have the term right but I've always focused the middle of the screen and it seems to fall away slightly towards the edges.) This relates to JeffKBs questions about lens improvements below.

-Has there been any changes/improvements with HDCP/HDMI compatibility? My SA8300 via TWC has never maintained a handshake via DVI with the 4805. Always assumed it was TWC software but thought I'd ask in case there was some miracle in the new box (actually I would upgrade tomorrow if you said yes, its a major pain) Some new "Extended Handshake Timeout for TWC boxes" would be swell

-Can I construe your comments below about better CW motor to mean an end to (or significant reduction in probability of) color wheel buzzing? Or is that inherent to DLP?

Thanks again for all the great information. I buy what I know and your posts make it easy to buy IF.
post #267 of 4267
Bob,

Many thanks for all the information that you have provided so far. However I do have just one question to ask regarding the 4x speed of the colour wheel. I currently have an SP4805 and am fairly sensitive to the 'rainbow effect'. Whilst I am able to ignore this most of the time it is one of the two reasons alongside HD resolution that I am considering an upgrade. How does this 4x colour wheel compare to the SP4805 ?. Bearing in mind that the IN76 is a brighter projector, am I more likely, less likely or not at all likely to notice any difference in the presence of this artifact.

Many thanks,

Tony.
post #268 of 4267
If the 48 pixels are not illuminated at all then there should
not be any light spill at all.

on the other hand if those 48 pixels are just tilted to their
max. position the usual way "black" is created in DLP, then
there is going to be some spill which would be the usual
greyish looking "black bars". And in this case 2.35 would
look worse with bigger bars.

From what Bob said those 48 pixels are not illuminated. So
I presume they will be pitch black so we wont see any spill
from those 48 pixels or in other words no spill outside 16:9 screen.

Is my interpretation right?
post #269 of 4267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ja Phule View Post

Not too sure what all is new with 1.3, but I thought it only added new features in audio, how would this affect video?

I'm most likely wrong, but I remember reading something about needing the 1.3 version in order to receive a 1080P signal over HDMI and was thinking about the new BD/HD DVD players that will soon be out.

If that is not true, then please ignore my question and I'll delete my previous post.
post #270 of 4267
Bob,

For ND filter usage, what is the mm size of the IN76 lens ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Infocus IN72-IN74-IN76