Optoma P1 4k Laser UST @ CES - Page 32 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 765Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #931 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 07:19 PM
Member
 
saneace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by smajumdar View Post
Has anyone got a shipping confirmation that their projector has been shipped? Amazon stills that it is on track for delivery by the 3rd but it still hasnt shipped. Plus their website now says it is temporarily out of stock 😱. Just worried that i may not even get it and may need to wait for another month or two 🤦🏻*♂️
I would not go chicken little just yet. Typically I do not get a tracking number on most anything until the day before or at best two days before expected delivery. I cannot say it would be unprecedented, but it would be unusual for them to have screwed up the supply chain calculation that badly. For what it is worth, in my experience, which is to say the experience of a random guy on the internet who is not inclined to elaborate about the nature of his work, when there is unexpectedly high demand for a product requiring that limited supply be allocated among expectant retailers, he who has the largest money stick tends to get preferred treatment. The Amazon money stick is more like a money club. Would give it until at least tomorrow night before worrying about it, and you can take comfort in the fact that you are price locked now.
saneace is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #932 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 07:33 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Elite Screens AR120H-CLR

FYI, I'm not sure if this is a mistake or not, but I will post this here anyway. Walmart selles Elite Screens AR120H-CLR for $1299 which generally goes for ~$2400.
golcarfel likes this.
Ilya Peltsverger is offline  
post #933 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
klas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,164
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 265 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Not shipped. I ordered on 24th. When did everyone else order from Amazon?
klas is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #934 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 07:43 PM
Member
 
saneace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by klas View Post
Not shipped. I ordered on 24th. When did everyone else order from Amazon?
The day before you (Sept. 23)
saneace is offline  
post #935 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 07:57 PM
Member
 
saneace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by klas View Post
Not shipped. I ordered on 24th. When did everyone else order from Amazon?
By the way, when my wife asks me about a new trinket, I usually just start spouting off tech jargon at random until she walks away. Worth a shot.
saneace is offline  
post #936 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 08:05 PM
Member
 
saneace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
"The problem is honey that this doohickey is just not optimized correctly for use with our other doohickey, despite assurances to the contrary, and that was going to result in premature death of our current doohickey, so I got this other doohickey, from a reputable manufacturer, to rescue us from the brutish ill treatment visited upon us by the manufacturer of our current doohickey. Also, there is no need to fret! I am going to re-market old doohickey to recoup most of the cost of the new doohickey. So, really, I just saved us from disaster. Your welcome."

Tosses old doohickey into the part graveyard for future use after this discussion is forgotten
saneace is offline  
post #937 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 08:31 PM
Senior Member
 
ProjectionHead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 279
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by bix26 View Post
I’ve seen a lot of exaggerated claims regarding screen texture on this and several other UST model’s topic pages. I feel this is a disingenuous marketing ploy thats been around since 480p projectors we’re common. Now I can’t prove this so I’ll just chalk it up to blissful ignorance.

What I can prove is that texture plays a very small roll in the perceived detail on screen. The major contributing factors are lens quality and the imagers themselves. Here’s how I’ll demonstrate.

First, I’ve taken a small piece of cardboard and covered it with a paper towel with far more texture than any screen even the cheapest low quality screen one could find.

Next, I’ve moved my 1080p PJ as close to the screen as possible to recreate the pixel density of a 4k screen. Admittedly it’s not exactly 1/4 of my screen, however I’m confident it’s close enough for demonstration purposes.



Here are the results, a clearly defined high density pixel grid on a paper towel.



(Note Tapatalk would only allow a low resolution upload, the pixels were even clearer in person)

My, reason for doing this silly experiment? To dispel myths used to sell products at ridiculous margins. After all this is the Audio Video Sience forum not the Audio Video Sales forum. Plus, even crude science and experiments are always fun for me.

Cheers!
I don't really believe your experiment proves the point you are trying to hammer home here.

1) As you acknowledge, you did not make your image 1/4 of the size of the screen; in fact it looks to be greater than 1/2 the size of the screen. As we know, 4k pixels are 1/4 the size of a 1080p pixel so you did not come close to recreating the pixel density of a 4k projector on a full size screen.

2) There is not a clearly defined pixel grid. Yes there are some pixels that you can see defined, but there are many that you cannot (red arrows). If you had the correct pixel size/density it would be even more pronounced.

Despite what you may believe and are trying to prove with your experiment, there is a science to projector screens and surface texture absolutely plays a role in the pixels geometry.

I have already posted images in this thread (and others) of actual 4k pixels being projected onto both textured and textureless surface and detailed how the geometry is distorted.

Don't (want to) believe me? I encourage anyone interested in getting the clearest image with their 4k projector to grab some free samples (Da-lite is a great company who will send out free samples of their HD Progressive surfaces) and see for themselves how an actual 4k pixel renders differently on a textured surface (even a paper towel) vs a textureless surface.

I've included a couple other resources from Projecta (owned by Legrand /Dalite), Crutchfield and AccucalAV as attachments for some examples for those who are interested.
AVS Thread: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...-4k-ready.html
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	10-1-19-pixels.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	51.2 KB
ID:	2622394   Click image for larger version

Name:	10-1-pixel2.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	128.0 KB
ID:	2622396   Click image for larger version

Name:	10-1-crutchfield.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	105.4 KB
ID:	2622400   Click image for larger version

Name:	10-1-accucalpage8a.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	171.2 KB
ID:	2622402  
Eagle13, bjanssen, ERuiz and 1 others like this.

Last edited by ProjectionHead; 10-01-2019 at 08:37 PM. Reason: updated attachments
ProjectionHead is online now  
post #938 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 08:38 PM
Senior Member
 
ProjectionHead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 279
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by saneace View Post
They still have the same Thursday projected arrival (from Amazon) that I always have, but should add that I also do not have a tracking number as of yet.
Good luck! Let us know if it ships on schedule.
ProjectionHead is online now  
post #939 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 09:03 PM
Member
 
saneace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectionHead View Post
I don't really believe your experiment proves the point you are trying to hammer home here.

1) As you acknowledge, you did not make your image 1/4 of the size of the screen; in fact it looks to be greater than 1/2 the size of the screen. As we know, 4k pixels are 1/4 the size of a 1080p pixel so you did not come close to recreating the pixel density of a 4k projector on a full size screen.

2) There is not a clearly defined pixel grid. Yes there are some pixels that you can see defined, but there are many that you cannot (red arrows). If you had the correct pixel size/density it would be even more pronounced.

Despite what you may believe and are trying to prove with your experiment, there is a science to projector screens and surface texture absolutely plays a role in the pixels geometry.

I have already posted images in this thread (and others) of actual 4k pixels being projected onto both textured and textureless surface and detailed how the geometry is distorted.

Don't (want to) believe me? I encourage anyone interested in getting the clearest image with their 4k projector to grab some free samples (Da-lite is a great company who will send out free samples of their HD Progressive surfaces) and see for themselves how an actual 4k pixel renders differently on a textured surface (even a paper towel) vs a textureless surface.

I've included a couple other resources from Projecta (owned by Legrand /Dalite), Crutchfield and AccucalAV as attachments for some examples for those who are interested.
AVS Thread: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...-4k-ready.html
I have nothing to add of value here one way or the other except to say that I appreciate seeing this kind of back and forth because, so long as it stays respectful and honest as I fully expect it will here, then it is a healthy discussion to have and, moreover, one which (I hope) will benefit all concerned in the end.
bjanssen and bix26 like this.
saneace is offline  
post #940 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 09:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
klas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,164
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 265 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by saneace View Post

By the way, when my wife asks me about a new trinket, I usually just start spouting off tech jargon at random until she walks away. Worth a shot.
Haha yeah I have tried that and sometimes it works

Xiaomi Mija Mi Laser UST 1080P (International), Sharp 4k 65", LG 4k 43", Nvidia Shield
klas is offline  
post #941 of 1668 Old 10-01-2019, 10:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bix26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 752 Post(s)
Liked: 402
Optoma P1 4k Laser UST @ CES

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectionHead View Post
I don't really believe your experiment proves the point you are trying to hammer home here.







1) As you acknowledge, you did not make your image 1/4 of the size of the screen; in fact it looks to be greater than 1/2 the size of the screen. As we know, 4k pixels are 1/4 the size of a 1080p pixel so you did not come close to recreating the pixel density of a 4k projector on a full size screen.







2) There is not a clearly defined pixel grid. Yes there are some pixels that you can see defined, but there are many that you cannot (red arrows). If you had the correct pixel size/density it would be even more pronounced.







Despite what you may believe and are trying to prove with your experiment, there is a science to projector screens and surface texture absolutely plays a role in the pixels geometry.







I have already posted images in this thread (and others) of actual 4k pixels being projected onto both textured and textureless surface and detailed how the geometry is distorted.







Don't (want to) believe me? I encourage anyone interested in getting the clearest image with their 4k projector to grab some free samples (Da-lite is a great company who will send out free samples of their HD Progressive surfaces) and see for themselves how an actual 4k pixel renders differently on a textured surface (even a paper towel) vs a textureless surface.







I've included a couple other resources from Projecta (owned by Legrand /Dalite), Crutchfield and AccucalAV as attachments for some examples for those who are interested.



AVS Thread: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...-4k-ready.html






I acknowledged that the pixel density was not as high as 4k and that the experiment was crude. All the same I did move the paper towel much closer and took more pictures. The pictures below demonstrate a pixel density higher than what you would see on a 120” 4k screen. Yes, the geometry issues do get worse as you stated. However this is a result of the looseness of the paper towel scotch taped to thin card stock. I think it’s safe to say most screens even cheap ones will be at least MUCH flatter with less texture.





(A Paper Towel “I still see pixels”)

Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_4.jpg
Views:	32
Size:	653.9 KB
ID:	2622454











Going by the marketing material above that textured screens can’t resolve 4K content, wouldn’t all acoustically woven screen and lenticular (UST specific texture) screens be incompatible with 4k projectors? Nothing in the marketing material above has me convinced, anymore than marketing material claiming $3,000 speaker cables are better than $200 ones.



I’m only taking this up to counter the relentless sales pitches and marketing that’s been going on in these threads. If people would rather believe marketing material from Screen Innovations, Da Lite, and the rest of the most expensive screen manufacturers and their dealers such as yourself that’s fine. I just hope they save themselves some hard earned money and get samples from companies such as SilverTicket, ViewSonic, EliteScreens, XY Screens, or VividStorm before they do. I doubt there is much difference if any. In fact I’d speculate they’re made in the same factories and same machines. Honestly, I’m guessing the only difference is the markup.



Sometimes you pay more you get more like cars, watches, homes etc. where the R&D and raw materials are much costlier. Other times your only paying for a higher margin and a brands marketing budget.



I’ll let people draw their own conclusion, here. I rest my case. Hopefully, this thread can move back towards impartial opinions on the P1 rather than sales pitches and agendas (mine being just helping out fellow enthusiasts make informed decisions).
J Bone, .bimsarck and saneace like this.

Last edited by bix26; 10-01-2019 at 11:10 PM.
bix26 is offline  
post #942 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 05:37 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 162
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Guys plz start posting pics, videos, tests, benchmarks, calibration, etc.. as soon as you put your hands on your P1!
J Bone likes this.
Gae80uk is offline  
post #943 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 06:18 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 83
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 18
It's seems that some people received it : https://twitter.com/hdtvpodcast/stat...45501033168897
solal- is offline  
post #944 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 07:41 AM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 22,250
Mentioned: 282 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3795 Post(s)
Liked: 1762
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
As someone who has been developing Projection Screen coatings since 2003, I feel I can offer some definitive information, and perhaps some advice here.

Even back in the days of 800 x 600 & 480i projected resolution, there were marked differences of how pixel grids were resolved between various screen textures.

But back then the case was that texture was your friend...for two reasons.

1st: It helped diffuse the incoming Projected light, because most screens...textured surfaces not withstanding...were coming it at over 1.0 gain because most Projectors were far more dim than today's units (<sub 900 lumen) , and what with most every single projector (CRTs get a pass) not having light-uniformity values much above 65-70%....that being the case, the center of most images would be noticeably brighter than at the edges. Light that was effectively scattered via diffusion mitigated the tendency of such surfaces to "Hot Spot".

2nd: The contours (bumps) of texture would break up the uniform pixel grid pattern (Screen Door Effect ie: SDE), making it less discernible at the distances most felt constrained to view imagery at.

That last point is validated by the fact that has image resolution has increased, the old standards set down as Law that one must observe 1.8 to 2.0 to 1 viewing ratios (eyes to screen) became outdated. And again, when some PJs improved their light uniformity values to be above 70%, eye strain issues became less a concern. But then SDE became more of an issue, because people did not want anything so distracting to ruin their viewing pleasure.

At this point a clarification between SDE and Pixels must be made. SDE is most commonly thought of as the Grid Lines that show because projector optics typically have significantly higher pixel density than the image they project, allowing the fine lines, which are much smaller than the pixels themselves, to be seen.
DLP Projectors had less of an issue than did LCD Projectors because they use a single Mirror instead of 3 Panels, but when an image is blown up to 100"s and beyond, many can still see the actual Pixel structure of an image. Especially Lasik Altered Mutants.

As far as Painted Screens go, initially rolling on coatings was initially the order of the day, and if done correctly resulted in surface textures that were smoother than their Mfg Screen counterparts. Problem was....that smoother surface let the SDE be all the more noticeable. Just the same, such surfaces were "4K Ready" long before we ever imagined 4K as being a reality.

First there had to come 720p and then 1080p, resolutions that reduced the size of the LCD Grids (and increased Pixel density). That combined with better light uniformity (usually) helped push in the Viewing Distance to Screen Width ratio distances more akin to 1.5:1 But darn....the closer you got to a screen with smaller Pixels, the larger those pixels became. A Catch-22 scenario was the result. But by that time (2008> )image quality concerns had gravitated to Contrast being more important...and those who wanted to remove SDE from the equation turned to SXRD & LyCos projectors. That took care of the SDE.....but

So bringing us back to today.....4K resolution (Native or EShift) Pixel density is even more increased.....but in many cases, so has Contrast, and the latter is now playing a critical part in how easily any artifact, screen or PJ induced, is resolved by the viewer's eyesight.

The higher the contrast, the more defined the differences in light/dark image content. This also means the Gradient Grey Scale is increased, allowing for far more of an increase in shadow depth perception. In the case of individual Pixels, there is always going to be some space between them, and when again...an image is blown up to huge proportions, the difference between a lit area (used Pixel) and the unused space becomes more apparent. Smaller...but still there. And since 4K means people are moving in still closer to their screens....some can begin to see even the much smaller Pixels. Or the much smaller Grid Lines of the LCD Panels. SXRD & LyCos PJs are not wholly exempt from this, just far more proficient in increasing the "visible" difference between a active and inactive Pixel. Image Smoothing technology (Panasonic's LCD-oriented Smooth Screen Tech) was the very best at eliminating all vestiges of Pixelation and SDE, but there was a cost....sharpness would suffer a bit.

Finally, with 4K rising in popularity, Mfg Screen concerns started to jump on the "4K Ready" Band Wagon. At the start, that really was just a Promotional Slogan...nothing had been done to smooth out the Screen surfaces. So Non-Mfg Screen surfaces (Painted Walls and Boards...Inexpensive PCV Materials) and curiously, the very least expensive PVC Mfg Screens all ruled the roost in that respect. That opened the eyes of the Screen MFg, and of a sudden...Smooth was in...because a lot of End Users had complained about seeing even the greatly reduced LCD Grid Lines and /or Pixels because textured surfaces would present areas that allowed shadowing differences due to texture high & low points.

And of course, the closer one sat, the more easily resolved such artifacts would become.

A ultra smooth surface is unforgiving as far as one discerning any projected artifact, where as a textured surface can and does highlight such artifacts even more....destroying what advantage higher resolution brings to the viewing experience. Because...once you see such "artifact-ing", you can't "un-see" it...your always looking for it in the brighter areas of an image.

So on one hand, @bix26 is correct in stating that texture does not reduce the ability to resolve 4K Resolution......but it does indeed distract from the ability to view an image as pristine as possible. Any texture will distract one's perception that they are looking into a different reality....a "Window" into another place in time.

Moving on......a UST Projector CANNOT perform effectively on any screen that is in any appreciable way Angular or Retro Reflective, or that has a gain exceeding much higher than 1.0. That pretty much encompasses virtually all Ambient Light "Rejection" Screens....screens that accept light coming in from a specific angle different from the Projector. Only recently developed specialized Screens that collect and redirect the Image coming in at such a extreme angle of incidence can effectively employ both Gain and Ambient Light performance when a UST Projector is in use. That criteria is severely limiting...there are not many screens available that fit that definition...fewer that actually do what they portend to do...and almost none that do actually work and don't come down the Pike prohibitively expensive.

There is a good reason most advertising of UST Projectors involve showing them projecting directly onto a Wall. Most Walls are under 1.0 gain...ergo very suitable for UST Projection.

Sadly....because UST does make great good sense for Family Room "TV Replacement", there will be a period where ALR Screens intended to work well with UST PJs will cost more than they should, because the demand to offset ambient light is a real issue. But not an intractable one.

For many, simply employing a "SMOOTH" 1.0 gain (or less) Grey surface...Mfg or Painted, will mitigate some degree of diffused ambient light that strikes the Screen, helping to maintain Blacks and Color vibrancy. Such a Screen is known as being ALR (Ambient Light Resistant) And USTs that have an abundance of Lumen output (...and decent Contrast...) make such simple surfaces all the more readily acceptable....overcoming the limitations of a screen having a lower gain.

So knowing what to get, and what to expect is the surest route to satisfaction. Unrealistic expectations have shot down many end users, who tend to blame the equipment / Screens or Mfg claims before they can accept that they themselves were self-misguided due to not knowing exactly what the complete picture involves.

DIY Screen making has had a handle at delivering Contrast Boosting and Gain and greatly overcoming Ambient Light without overtly creating Angular reflection for some years now, so in that respect has always been ahead of the Game. But UST Projection is the absolute most limiting application. Again...not wholly intractable, but limiting as far as how much ALR and Gain increase can be done without drastically attenuating the image.

..............but that is something best left for discussion on the DIY Screen Forum.

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan is online now  
post #945 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 08:57 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilya Peltsverger View Post
FYI, I'm not sure if this is a mistake or not, but I will post this here anyway. Walmart selles Elite Screens AR120H-CLR for $1299 which generally goes for ~$2400.
Thanks for the heads up! Amazon also has it on sale. Picked up a 120" for $1299. Definitely a good deal. ^_^
golcarfel is offline  
post #946 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 10:22 AM
g4s
Senior Member
 
g4s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 43
For anyone who was wondering like me, the USB media player can read exFat drives. Good news for Mac users.
g4s is online now  
post #947 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 10:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bix26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 752 Post(s)
Liked: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by g4s View Post
For anyone who was wondering like me, the USB media player can read exFat drives. Good news for Mac users.


That means no 4gb cap on file sizes?
bix26 is offline  
post #948 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 10:28 AM
g4s
Senior Member
 
g4s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by bix26 View Post
That means no 4gb cap on file sizes?
That's right.
g4s is online now  
post #949 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 11:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 475
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked: 237
Anybody knows if the lan port is gigabit?
barth2 is offline  
post #950 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 11:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
bennutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 508
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Trigger Pulled!

I found them in stock at Projector People.
One on the way next week along with an Elite Aeon CineGrey 3D screen (1.2 gain)

Woot!
bennutt is online now  
post #951 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 11:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
klas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,164
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 265 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post
I found them in stock at Projector People.
One on the way next week along with an Elite Aeon CineGrey 3D screen (1.2 gain)

Woot!
Congrats on P1, but I don't think that screen is ALR designed for UST so considering its price you can get ALR for UST for same $$$

Xiaomi Mija Mi Laser UST 1080P (International), Sharp 4k 65", LG 4k 43", Nvidia Shield
klas is offline  
post #952 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 12:47 PM
Senior Member
 
ProjectionHead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 279
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post
I found them in stock at Projector People.
One on the way next week along with an Elite Aeon CineGrey 3D screen (1.2 gain)

Woot!
That screen will not work with the P1; it is only for standard throw projectors and will negate the light coming form the extreme angle of a UST projector.
bix26 likes this.
ProjectionHead is online now  
post #953 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 01:30 PM
g4s
Senior Member
 
g4s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post
I found them in stock at Projector People.
One on the way next week along with an Elite Aeon CineGrey 3D screen (1.2 gain)

Woot!
Like ProjectionHead said, better rethink that screen.
From Elite Screens product description "Angular-Reflective material is not compatible with ultra/short-throw projectors"
g4s is online now  
post #954 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 01:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
bennutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 508
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectionHead View Post
That screen will not work with the P1; it is only for standard throw projectors and will negate the light coming form the extreme angle of a UST projector.
Quote:
Originally Posted by klas View Post
Congrats on P1, but I don't think that screen is ALR designed for UST so considering its price you can get ALR for UST for same $$$
THANK YOU FOR THE QUICK HEADS UP!
I was able to switch my order to the Aeon CLR (StarBright) for short throws.
Side note, my vendor had a pretty extreme price drop on that screen so PM for details (I seem to remember pricing isn't allowed on AVS threads)
bennutt is online now  
post #955 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 01:35 PM
Member
 
chinmokutak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectionHead View Post
That screen will not work with the P1; it is only for standard throw projectors and will negate the light coming form the extreme angle of a UST projector.
just curious... what would happen if he was to use it with P1?
chinmokutak is online now  
post #956 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 02:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
bennutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 508
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinmokutak View Post
just curious... what would happen if he was to use it with P1?
This explanation from the Elite site makes sense:

ALR screen materials are typically made for standard “long-throw” projectors. As long as the projector and material are aligned in accordance with SMPTE standards, you will get optimal picture brightness, color-contrast, and black level dynamic range while off-axis light is essentially rejected. Because Short-throw and UST projectors spread out their light signal over a comparatively short distance, much of the light is off-axis and will therefore be rejected by the material.

Materials like our Starbright CLR® are specifically designed for UST projectors. Their reflective microstructures are aligned to reflect the upward spread light signal from UST projectors into a viewer’s field of vision. At the same time, the “CLR®” rejects other forms of off-axis light such as regular room lighting, window light, ceiling light or even the direct signal from a standard throw projector.
bennutt is online now  
post #957 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 02:10 PM
g4s
Senior Member
 
g4s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 327
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinmokutak View Post
just curious... what would happen if he was to use it with P1?
Spontaneous combustion?.... Just kiddin'
g4s is online now  
post #958 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 02:13 PM
Member
 
chinmokutak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post

This explanation from the Elite site makes sense:

ALR screen materials are typically made for standard “long-throw” projectors. As long as the projector and material are aligned in accordance with SMPTE standards, you will get optimal picture brightness, color-contrast, and black level dynamic range while off-axis light is essentially rejected. Because Short-throw and UST projectors spread out their light signal over a comparatively short distance, much of the light is off-axis and will therefore be rejected by the material.

Materials like our Starbright CLR® are specifically designed for UST projectors. Their reflective microstructures are aligned to reflect the upward spread light signal from UST projectors into a viewer’s field of vision. At the same time, the “CLR®” rejects other forms of off-axis light such as regular room lighting, window light, ceiling light or even the direct signal from a standard throw projector.
so, it will look like light shining on ventablack? that's kinda cool lol

chinmokutak is online now  
post #959 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 02:41 PM
Member
 
Koeikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by klas View Post
Not shipped. I ordered on 24th. When did everyone else order from Amazon?
I ordered on the 16th... still says arriving by tomorrow, but no movement yet. I've had pre-orders go both ways in similar situations /w Amazon. A couple showing up with basically overnight shipping and at least one that got punted the day it was supposed to show up. More pre-orders have showed up on time than the ones that haven't (but the more niche, less widespread release lowers my confidence in this case).

If I'm not in first batch, I'm cancelling and reevaluating over Black Friday.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post

This explanation from the Elite site makes sense:

ALR screen materials are typically made for standard “long-throw” projectors. As long as the projector and material are aligned in accordance with SMPTE standards, you will get optimal picture brightness, color-contrast, and black level dynamic range while off-axis light is essentially rejected. Because Short-throw and UST projectors spread out their light signal over a comparatively short distance, much of the light is off-axis and will therefore be rejected by the material.

Materials like our Starbright CLR® are specifically designed for UST projectors. Their reflective microstructures are aligned to reflect the upward spread light signal from UST projectors into a viewer’s field of vision. At the same time, the “CLR®” rejects other forms of off-axis light such as regular room lighting, window light, ceiling light or even the direct signal from a standard throw projector.
Isn't this overall messaging fairly misleading? I'm still pretty noob to CLR/ALR, but there are ALR screens that are 'specifically designed' for UST projectors as well? If I read this blurb in a vacuum, I'd probably come away thinking CLR was inherently superior to ALR for UST projectors.
diggumsmax likes this.
Koeikan is offline  
post #960 of 1668 Old 10-02-2019, 03:08 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennutt View Post
THANK YOU FOR THE QUICK HEADS UP!
I was able to switch my order to the Aeon CLR (StarBright) for short throws.
Side note, my vendor had a pretty extreme price drop on that screen so PM for details (I seem to remember pricing isn't allowed on AVS threads)
sent you a PM, kindly share. Thanks
stfidel is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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