Originally Posted by Archibald1
Why does it not being a 'home theatre projector' preclude it from built in DTM?
One would assume as the system is modular they could make their own DTM box....
Is it something they are likely to do?
Maybe they feel there is enough out there already at a mere fraction of the cost of their system that it isn't worth their while to develop it.
Originally Posted by Archibald1
I completely get that, being a Hi-Fi separates man since the early nineties, but as with anything to do with fidelity, having too many connections in a chain can make for too many variables to adjust and more breaks in the signal.
To me the best place to have an effective DTM solution is in the display itself. That also has the benefit it will work on whatever is connected to it.
Originally Posted by mani
It’s same logic for Madvr or Lumagen , since they have mastered DTM, why don’t they make their own display and have one box solution .
No reason and moreover unprofitable to re invent the wheel . It’s the way things will be going forward , more and more specialized companies going forward .
You were referring to JVC and other home theater projectors incorporating DTM as part of querying why Christie have not done so with respect to the Eclipse. Those are Home Theater projectors, the Eclipse is not. As such your comparison is comparing apples vs oranges.
Furthermore, it is important to note there that with the madVR Envy what you have is essentially a very highly-specced powerful PC computer that is exclusively dedicated to carrying out the video processing. Wherein Christie would need to add the same along with the equivalent to all of madVR's unique and superior software and algorithms to achieve even close to the same thing. Wherein, one of the main reasons why JVCs DTM is not as good as madVR's is due to the massive difference in processing and GPU power involved. The other is that
has been developing, evolving, and improving his madVR algorithms for years
Hence, DTM isn't something simple and easy to add of precisely the same performance quality. The DTM in the JVCs pales in comparison to madVR's. madVR's DTM is the best in the world as of right now. So personally IMO it would be a waste of resources Christie attempting to reinvent the wheel and add their own DTM. Because even if they did I wouldn't use it unless it was as good as madVR; wherein, do you clearly do not realize nor appreciate just how many years of R&D and beta testing and more R&D and more beta testing and more R&D has gone into developing madVR. Furthermore, madVR is not solely DTM, it is fully comprehensive video processing which provides not only the best DTM currently available but also the best upscaling in the world as well, as well as an array of AI video processing, including bright highlights recovery and shadow detail recovery, as well as simple 3d LUT calibration etc. etc.
In short, madVR have invested years of R&D to develop the ultimate video processor. It does not make sense for Christie to attempt to attempt to reinvent the wheel and develop their own version, which indubitably would not be as good. That said, what would make sense and would be superb would be for them to license the technology from madVR and incorporate the madVR video processing into the Eclipse. But until that happens I will be using and recommending that any and all other people who purchase an Eclipse uses a madVR Envy to carry out the video processing.
It's different with the likes of the JVC Home Theater projectors because the cost of a madVR Envy could be as much as the cost of the projector, so it is good to have a DTM solution built-in for free. However, personally I will be using a madVR Envy with the JVC projectors as well, because not only is the DTM significantly better but also for the array of other video processing that the Envy provides that is above and beyond that which is provided by the JVCs. Same goes for all other projector brands as of right now.