Originally Posted by Lygren
...I guess proof is in the puddin´ - some 30 mill:1 on / off contrast and 30k lumens in combination with that footprint does not come about as inefficient in my book compared to other laser based systems that is... As for FALD zones, I believe Arrow or Art stated 2 million, and no blooming whatsoever?
There are always room for improvement and I have to agree that the patent is not really impressive as such, it´s really quite basic, but if you know patents these are the ones that has value if proven production worthy (which the 30 mill:1 + 30k lumens ++ does). Similarly as that very basic LG (originally Kodak) OLED dual blue patent - which basically gave them control of the entire industry. Most patents, however, are made by scientist and/or patent trolls that has no intention of using it for manufacture but rather sell it off to some patent harvester or use it to block new tech from happening. Companies taking on patents in order to actually create new inventions such as Christie here, however, have my outmost respect and admiration, I know (firsthand...) how hard that is to actually do....
I'd love to see this projector in person, I'm sure it looks great, but even if I were a millionaire I'd have a problem entertaining such an inefficient machine, costing so much, because I'm an engineer and such things bug me.
I wonder why LCoS isn't used in commercial cinemas, can they not handle the heat / lumens? RGB laser light seems like a perfect combination with light modulators which rely on a given incoming polarization angle like LCoS or LCD. That way they wouldn't suffer the 50% lumen penalty right off the bat like they do with randomly polarized lamp light or Blue + Yellow phosphor sources. Seems like a missed opportunity. Then they wouldn't even need a dual set of light modulators / attenuators. 20M:1 isn't that much better than 1M:1 contrast which isn't *that* much better than a 5000$ JVC, so it's diminishing returns. Especially considering that 99% of the world's commercial cinemas have 2000:1 DLPs in them and most people are perfectly fine with them. Plus the exit and floor lights in the cinemas ruin the black level. I seriously doubt anywhere near 20M:1 will be seen.
Dual light modulation only makes sense for DLP's pathetic native contrast. To me, a much better use of dual modulators and the optical complexity increase, is using one in phase modulation mode to redistribute luminous energy in the scene to where it's needed, so you aren't throwing away 95% of your electricity bill down the toilet. This is like that patent that Christie also owns, that they bought from that Canadian company back in 2016. But even that design is quite "weak" compared to what else is possible.
Still, having 2M zones for 8M pixels will result in a blooming zone of 2x2 pixels which it probably way smaller than the human visual system can cope with, so that's far better than FALD on TVs and comparable to a Brightside monitor using a 1080p grayscale filter in the back panel for the first stage modulation, then the filters and to a 4K front panel. That would surely be fine. A blurred or lower resolution back modulator would result in less optical alignment issues.
That's the problem with this tech. It'll be obsolete by the time Christie (or was it Barco?) implements the dual LCoS HDR projector, which will require 1/10th the laser power to deliver the same peak nits, or, conversely, 10x higher peak nits (in smaller windows) with the same laser power backing it.
And as someone said, nobody needs 400 nits white field in a blacked-out cinema. So those nits are only for highlights and those highlights are still well below what they would be on a projector which didn't mask 95% of its light so that the other 5% can get very bright. Phased modulation mode is 10x more efficient and could allow 4k peak nits in smaller windows, while also lowering the black floor where it's not required. That'd actually work great for DLP too, where you only really notice the poor black level in dark scenes or dark areas of scenes. So redistributing light 10:1 would boost DLP contrast by 10x.
Fundamentally though, transmissive projection is a ridiculously inefficient technology for HDR. Even with FALD, TVs have to implement hundreds of zones and then most of those LEDs are only used to some fraction of their potential at any given time, like a Lamborghini only ever being used for grocery runs through school zones.
So their potential max lumens aren't being spent where they actually count, in places where you could have PQ codes reaching 10k nits. The physics of specular highlights makes a mockery out of all these display technologies, which are fundamentally wasteful. Either you're wasting lumens, or lumens potential. The Lcos phase modulation trick is neat but will also probably have some growing pains and probably some blooming, who knows.