Optoma at CES 2016 - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 25Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 70 Old 01-14-2016, 02:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,985
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post
They only have "4 million" physical pixels. But with shifting, 8 million pixel positions can be illuminated.

Essentially: "Odd" 4M / Shift / "Even" 4M. The pixels have twice the area that they "should" have. Hence they overlap. (See my diagram above.)

Hence Scott's "faux-k".

How does my BenQ 1070 work - is it the same?
JRock3x8 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 70 Old 01-14-2016, 02:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
R Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
How does my BenQ 1070 work - is it the same?
It's the left part of my diagram -- 1920x1080 is nominally 2 million pixels. Orthogonal. No shifting.
R Johnson is offline  
post #33 of 70 Old 01-14-2016, 02:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,985
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post
It's the left part of my diagram -- 1920x1080 is nominally 2 million pixels. Orthogonal. No shifting.
less enthused about this. How long do we have to wait for a true 4k projector that doesn't require a second mortgage? (and yes I am fully well aware that beggars can't be choosers)
JRock3x8 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 70 Old 01-15-2016, 04:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2388
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
b) there's a cost element to this as well. I expect Optoma's projector to cost substantially less than other 4k projectors.
I don't, Optoma's last LED projector cost 2-3x what projectors of similar performance cost. There have been rumors of $10k MSRP for this I believe, and I'd believe it, and it may almost match the performance of the Planar 8150 with Optoma's track record.
stanger89 is offline  
post #35 of 70 Old 01-15-2016, 05:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,985
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
I don't, Optoma's last LED projector cost 2-3x what projectors of similar performance cost. There have been rumors of $10k MSRP for this I believe, and I'd believe it, and it may almost match the performance of the Planar 8150 with Optoma's track record.
ok well that's gross
JRock3x8 is online now  
post #36 of 70 Old 01-15-2016, 07:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
I was reading elsewhere about this qualifying as a UHD device and TI showing that they could do single pixel patterns, like single pixel white lines.

I wonder what the images off the screen would look like if the projector was fed a pattern like this where every black spot is supposed to be a single black pixel in 4K space.

--Darin
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image_1452870918286.jpg
Views:	189
Size:	161.1 KB
ID:	1185682  
LumenChip likes this.
darinp2 is offline  
post #37 of 70 Old 01-16-2016, 05:29 PM
Senior Member
 
LumenChip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 366
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Assuming the pixels are shifted 1/2 of a pixel height it is highly unlikely a single pixel can be correctly represented. The likely outcome is pixel-like black spots that will be scaled to 1/4 the size of the original pixel. If the pixels are shifted vertically the most likely outcome is alternating black and white 1/4 scale pixel-like spots in the vertical direction. The black pixels will likely align themselves side by side horizontally creating a solid black line and similarly for the white pixels. If the assessment is correct, the black pixel-like spots will actually be overlaps between neighboring black pixels and similarly for the white pixel-like spots. This leaves us with one question, what become of the zones where the white and black portions of the pixels overlap. The result will be grey pixel-like structures that equal the combined total of white and black pixel-like structures.

An untrained eye such as myself can easily be fooled into believing that clearly defined pixels are being represented, unless the exact mapping of the source is known.
LumenChip is offline  
post #38 of 70 Old 01-16-2016, 05:37 PM
Senior Member
 
LumenChip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 366
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 123
On a different topic, given that the size of the pixel-like structures are 1/4 the size of a true 4K pixel structure, the lens will need to be very good in order to resolve this resolution, likely higher quality than needed for a full 4K chip.
LumenChip is offline  
post #39 of 70 Old 01-16-2016, 07:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by LumenChip View Post
On a different topic, given that the size of the pixel-like structures are 1/4 the size of a true 4K pixel structure, the lens will need to be very good in order to resolve this resolution, likely higher quality than needed for a full 4K chip.
If they were really supposed to be resolved I would say so, but given that it can't even do all patterns in 4K space I would say that the lens requirements are somewhere between 2k and 4k. It isn't like the sources even have those very small structures from the overlapping pixels.

--Darin
darinp2 is offline  
post #40 of 70 Old 01-18-2016, 11:05 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
R Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by LumenChip View Post
On a different topic, given that the size of the pixel-like structures are 1/4 the size of a true 4K pixel structure, the lens will need to be very good in order to resolve this resolution, likely higher quality than needed for a full 4K chip.
The pixel area of the TI "4K" DMD is very likely to be TWICE the area of a true 4K pixel.
See my diagram in post 24.
R Johnson is offline  
post #41 of 70 Old 01-18-2016, 11:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post
The pixel area of the TI "4K" DMD is very likely to be TWICE the area of a true 4K pixel.
We could think of this as 184% fill ratio.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #42 of 70 Old 01-22-2016, 11:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
With JVC getting 1,600 plus calibrated lumens and 4,500 rated hours from a lamp based projector, they are going to need to get more than 1,200 lumens from this new light source. Other wise, there is very little incentive to buyers to pay more for the new light source in a projector.

1200 lumens would be plenty for me- particularly with a gain screen. I will not buy another lamp-based projector.
mobius is offline  
post #43 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 07:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post
The pixel area of the TI "4K" DMD is very likely to be TWICE the area of a true 4K pixel.
See my diagram in post 24.
The TI 4K DMD displays a true UHD image...NO OVERLAP. The test patterns used during the TI demos proved this conclusively.
Pete is offline  
post #44 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 08:54 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
The TI 4K DMD displays a true UHD image...NO OVERLAP. The test patterns used during the TI demos proved this conclusively.
What do you think the fill ratio is of each sub-image (each half image in time)? Close to 100% or close to 50%.

Did you see the images yourself or know of a place with close up pictures with the test patterns?

I'm guessing there are certain patterns in 8k space that they could not do well, but if they could I would like to see that as anything higher than 50% fill ratio would mean overlap between the sub-images and low fill ratio would hurt both light output and contrast ratio.

--Darin
darinp2 is offline  
post #45 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 11:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 87
If you were TI and you developed a proprietary way of displaying 8.3 million pixels from 4.15 million micro-mirrors...WITH NO OVERLAP...would you publish the exact (detailed) formula/methodology for how this is done...just to satisfy some doubting Thomases on AVS forum that the 8.3 million pixels on the screen are real and uncompromised? I suspect there are a bunch of NDAs in place that are being honored...which is why all we're getting here is speculation. In due time we'll all have the opportunity to throw whatever test patterns at it we want...to stick our noses up to the screen in search of an Achilles heel that will once and for all ward off any chance that this is, in fact, a real game changer.
RLBURNSIDE and pgwalsh like this.
Pete is offline  
post #46 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 12:03 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 11,796
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3585 Post(s)
Liked: 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobius View Post
1200 lumens would be plenty for me- particularly with a gain screen. I will not buy another lamp-based projector.
Is there a reason you are willing to pay a premium for laser over lamp?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
If you were TI and you developed a proprietary way of displaying 8.3 million pixels from 4.15 million micro-mirrors...WITH NO OVERLAP...would you publish the exact (detailed) formula/methodology for how this is done...just to satisfy some doubting Thomases on AVS forum that the 8.3 million pixels on the screen are real and uncompromised? I suspect there are a bunch of NDAs in place that are being honored...which is why all we're getting here is speculation. In due time we'll all have the opportunity to throw whatever test patterns at it we want...to stick our noses up to the screen in search of an Achilles heel that will once and for all ward off any chance that this is, in fact, a real game changer.
You didn't answer Darin's question. Did you see the demo in person? Do you have a link to the test patterns?

TI doesn't owe us anything, but if they want consumers(us) to buy their technology then they are going to have to do better than "Just trust us".

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is online now  
post #47 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 12:10 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
If you were TI and you developed a proprietary way of displaying 8.3 million pixels from 4.15 million micro-mirrors...WITH NO OVERLAP...would you publish the exact (detailed) formula/methodology for how this is done...just to satisfy some doubting Thomases on AVS forum that the 8.3 million pixels on the screen are real and uncompromised? I suspect there are a bunch of NDAs in place that are being honored...which is why all we're getting here is speculation. In due time we'll all have the opportunity to throw whatever test patterns at it we want...to stick our noses up to the screen in search of an Achilles heel that will once and for all ward off any chance that this is, in fact, a real game changer.
Sounds to me like you really don't have much clue whether there is overlap or not and are just guessing. Time will tell, but my guess is that those who claim that there are 8 million individual elements on the screen with no overlap and no correlation between the elements (anymore than an 8 million pixel chip) will be proven wrong. Smoke and mirrors are a big part of many demonstrations and some people are more gullible than others.

If Ti lets other people choose the test patterns and there are trustworthy people who get to run those patterns then I will trust things a lot more.

--Darin

Last edited by darinp2; 01-23-2016 at 01:04 PM.
darinp2 is offline  
post #48 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 12:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JackB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 3,822
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1463 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
If you were TI and you developed a proprietary way of displaying 8.3 million pixels from 4.15 million micro-mirrors...WITH NO OVERLAP...would you publish the exact (detailed) formula/methodology for how this is done...just to satisfy some doubting Thomases on AVS forum that the 8.3 million pixels on the screen are real and uncompromised? I suspect there are a bunch of NDAs in place that are being honored...which is why all we're getting here is speculation. In due time we'll all have the opportunity to throw whatever test patterns at it we want...to stick our noses up to the screen in search of an Achilles heel that will once and for all ward off any chance that this is, in fact, a real game changer.
Isn't there a white paper on this technology somewhere? I remember seeing a link for it but when I went to the link there was nothing there.

Jack
JackB is online now  
post #49 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 01:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
Sounds to me like you really don't have much clue whether there is overlap or not and are just guessing. Time will tell, but my guess is that those who claim that there are 8 million individual elements on the screen with no overlap and no correlation between the elements (anymore than an 8 million pixel chip) will be proven wrong. Smoke and mirrors are a big part of many demonstrations and some people are more gullible than others.

If Ti lets other people choose the test patterns and there are trustworthy people who get to run those patterns then I will trust things a lot more.

--Darin
I happen to have spoken to several engineering types at CEDIA who saw the demonstration and they confirmed that there were 8 million individual pixels displayed with perfect alignment...no overlap. Like I said...the opportunity to use whatever test patterns you want will come before the end of the year...3rd/4th quarter. And if my sources are proven wrong, I will own it. Hopefully you will do the same.
Pete is offline  
post #50 of 70 Old 01-23-2016, 07:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
I happen to have spoken to several engineering types at CEDIA who saw the demonstration and they confirmed that there were 8 million individual pixels displayed with perfect alignment...no overlap. Like I said...the opportunity to use whatever test patterns you want will come before the end of the year...3rd/4th quarter. And if my sources are proven wrong, I will own it. Hopefully you will do the same.
Of course. Just to be clear, your position is that the on chip pixels from the chips for each sub-frame do not overlap spatially with any of the pixels from the next sub-frame on the screen, right?

I'll give you a clue. They wouldn't have to talk about having enough MTF to qualify as an 8 million pixel device if there was no overlap/correlation between the pixels. As an example, shoot pixels that overlap using 4 million mirrors flashed twice and you can make one of the 8 million little on screen pixels 100% luminance white and one next to it 50% luminance white for an MTF of about 2:1 and qualify as 8 million pixel resolution by some standards, but that does not mean there isn't overlap between adjacent pixels in 8 million on screen pixel space.

There are certain fundamental rules of physics that don't change. I'm guessing none of those engineers types you talked to got to choose their own test patterns. I've also had to explain certain fundamentals of contrast ratio to people who are supposed to be technical in this industry enough times that there are certain people I don't put a lot of faith in to be able to even properly apply fundamental physics they should have learned in school, despite them being able to make claims about how many years they have in the industry, how many people in the industry trust them, etc.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Last edited by darinp2; 01-23-2016 at 07:44 PM.
darinp2 is offline  
post #51 of 70 Old 01-24-2016, 10:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JackB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 3,822
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1463 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Darinp2,

I have been following the technical chat concerning the number of pixels displayed on this thread since the start. Because most of the detailed explanations are difficult to understand for my old mind I would like to put my understanding and the conflict into words that I understand. BTW, I used to own a wobulating Samsung RPTV so I have seen the diamond shaped overlapped picture.

I thought that I read that TI was saying that they have taken a 2K DMD device and added a deflection angle great enough to position the pixel alongside rather than overlapping it. This was done with an alternating cycle display technique that was possible because of the speed of the chip.

But then I thought I read that the chip wasn't fast enough to put all of the necessary 10 bit cycles on the screen sixty times a second.

Could you address this? Is it as simple as these two questions:

1. Can you deflect a chip far enough to avoid overlap?
2. This doubles, I think, the number of chip actions that a chip has been reqiured to execute at its native resolution. It was possible with wobulation, why not with a greater angle of deflection?

Appreciate your help on this.

Jack
JackB is online now  
post #52 of 70 Old 01-24-2016, 02:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackB View Post
1. Can you deflect a chip far enough to avoid overlap?
Here is what I think the crux of the issue is and why I mentioned that there are fundamentals of physics that still apply.

Imagine taking a 10k fps video of the screen and keep track of what the projector is doing at any one time. If for a single frame there are 2 sub-frames and each one of those sub-frames covers more than 50% of the image area (50% fill ratio on screen) then it doesn't matter how much you shift the images, there would be overlap between the 2 sub-frames. The only way to avoid overlap is to have the fill ratios on screen be less than or equal to 100% divided by the number of sub-frames.

Another thing to keep in mind is that a lenses job is to focus the chip on screen. It doesn't really matter whether one mirror is tilted 0.1 degrees different than the mirror next to it as far as where the photons land on the screen. Without a lens the photons from 2 side-by-side mirrors would fall on different places on the screen if they reflected at slightly different angles, but with a lens the photons from those 2 out-of-sync mirrors just enter the lens apart, but come back next to each other by the time light hits the screen.

If you could take all the light from a mirror with 92% fill factor and focus every one to small while focusing gaps to bigger such that got 50% fill factor on screen then you could do sub-images without overlap between them, but I see no evidence that TI has figured out how to do anything like that and if they were they would need to use some of the words they have to try to justify qualifying as a true 4k device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackB View Post
2. This doubles, I think, the number of chip actions that a chip has been reqiured to execute at its native resolution. It was possible with wobulation, why not with a greater angle of deflection?
Even if they had hugely different angles of deflection and 2 different lenses they would still have the issue that if you fill more than 18 square feet of a 36 square foot screen with each of 2 sub-frames then there is overlap between the sub-frames.

Imagine using 2 projectors where each has 4 million pixel chips and no special shifting elements. You could fill half the screen with one and half with the other, but if you are going to do it with little black gaps between pixels each projector would have to provide 50% fill ratio or less on screen to not have their pixels overlap.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #53 of 70 Old 01-24-2016, 03:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
R Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 61
In all likelihood, the "4 million" pixels in the new TI DMD cover 100 percent of the 16:9 image area. (Neglecting the small pixel-to-pixel edges which give a net area about 90 percent).

If an optical shift allows the other "4 million" pixels to be displayed in alternate sub-frames, there HAS to be overlap. 100% + 100% = 100% ??

But it's also very likely that this process can produce excellent video image quality and very good quality test patterns. I suspect that a single chip 4Mpix DLP projector with overlapping pixels may even be sharper than a "true" 8Mpix 3-chip projector considering alignment of the 3 chips.
darinp2 and Dragnet like this.
R Johnson is offline  
post #54 of 70 Old 01-24-2016, 05:10 PM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
If you were TI and you developed a proprietary way of displaying 8.3 million pixels from 4.15 million micro-mirrors...WITH NO OVERLAP...would you publish the exact (detailed) formula/methodology for how this is done...just to satisfy some doubting Thomases on AVS forum that the 8.3 million pixels on the screen are real and uncompromised? I suspect there are a bunch of NDAs in place that are being honored...which is why all we're getting here is speculation. In due time we'll all have the opportunity to throw whatever test patterns at it we want...to stick our noses up to the screen in search of an Achilles heel that will once and for all ward off any chance that this is, in fact, a real game changer.
Good post, although I believe the actual thing they do is simply patent their process so that even if you reverse engineer a stolen preview chip given to industry insiders that you would get sued to smithereens if you tried to copy it without negotiating a license deal first.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #55 of 70 Old 01-25-2016, 04:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2388
Frankly the whole resolution debate isn't that interesting to me. We know we're getting 4 megapixel device, and JVC has shown you can get great results with a 2 megapixel device (and/or Sony has shown it's very, very expensive to really do 8 megapixels 'correctly').

Nobody's talking about the more interesting question, will there be a significant improvement in contrast?
Mikenificent1 and pgwalsh like this.
stanger89 is offline  
post #56 of 70 Old 01-25-2016, 11:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,845
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2633 Post(s)
Liked: 1265
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
Frankly the whole resolution debate isn't that interesting to me. We know we're getting 4 megapixel device, and JVC has shown you can get great results with a 2 megapixel device (and/or Sony has shown it's very, very expensive to really do 8 megapixels 'correctly').

Nobody's talking about the more interesting question, will there be a significant improvement in contrast?
Yeah I'm not concerned about the detail. more the contrast.
Ruined is offline  
post #57 of 70 Old 01-25-2016, 02:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Ballis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 468
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked: 71
I find that new Philips led sollution to be whats most interesting here. Fingers crossed for crazy lumens
Ballis is offline  
post #58 of 70 Old 01-25-2016, 02:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 2,966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Instead of speculating how what and why TI is doing what it must be doing to achieve their 8 million pixels...instead of spinning that speculation into positives and negatives...why don't we all just wait until it launches and then see what the deal is.
Ballis likes this.
Pete is offline  
post #59 of 70 Old 01-25-2016, 06:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2388
What do we do until then though
Mikenificent1 and dstoe like this.
stanger89 is offline  
post #60 of 70 Old 01-27-2016, 03:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ericglo View Post
Is there a reason you are willing to pay a premium for laser over lamp?



You didn't answer Darin's question. Did you see the demo in person? Do you have a link to the test patterns?

TI doesn't owe us anything, but if they want consumers(us) to buy their technology then they are going to have to do better than "Just trust us".

The whole idea of lamps has served it's purpose, but I'm not very tweak-minded when it comes to projectors. I don't want to chase calibration drift as the lamp ages. I want to 'set it and forget it'.
Paul_Seng likes this.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a...
mobius is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
ces 2016 , dlp , Optoma

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off