Joined
·
1,799 Posts
Howdy,
I'm about to get an ehome 8500LC projector (new tubes) as an upgrade to my Sony D50. I'm interested in opinions about handling anamorphic material with it.
I'm projecting onto a 16:9 screen and driving the projector with a scaler. On the D50Q, I used 1280x720 and on the ehome I'm planning on using 1440x960.
The scaler I have (a mineral type scaler, if you get my not so subtle drift) will handle mapping different aspect ratios onto a constant sized output aspect ratio. So, in short, I can set my projector to a single res/aspect and leave it there and the scaler can handle different aspect input sources.
The part I'm not as sure about is what the aspect the projector should be left at. My original thought was leave the projector at 4x3, 1440x960 and tell the scaler to only use the 16x9 area of the raster (roughly 1440x720 I think). But another thought was to squeeze the raster on the ehome to get more of the raster lines visible.
The debate to me is that if the projectors res tops out around 960, then I'm not going to get anything by squeezing the raster down. I mean, you can only squeeze until the lines start to overlap and at 960, I'm thinking the projector is already close to that (I don't have it yet to test - next week I hope).
I want to light the maximum amount of phosphor on the raster with the sharpest image, but I'm just not sure if my first approach (no squeezing the raster, let the scaler do it all) is the best way to go.
Any thoughts/comments?
I'm about to get an ehome 8500LC projector (new tubes) as an upgrade to my Sony D50. I'm interested in opinions about handling anamorphic material with it.
I'm projecting onto a 16:9 screen and driving the projector with a scaler. On the D50Q, I used 1280x720 and on the ehome I'm planning on using 1440x960.
The scaler I have (a mineral type scaler, if you get my not so subtle drift) will handle mapping different aspect ratios onto a constant sized output aspect ratio. So, in short, I can set my projector to a single res/aspect and leave it there and the scaler can handle different aspect input sources.
The part I'm not as sure about is what the aspect the projector should be left at. My original thought was leave the projector at 4x3, 1440x960 and tell the scaler to only use the 16x9 area of the raster (roughly 1440x720 I think). But another thought was to squeeze the raster on the ehome to get more of the raster lines visible.
The debate to me is that if the projectors res tops out around 960, then I'm not going to get anything by squeezing the raster down. I mean, you can only squeeze until the lines start to overlap and at 960, I'm thinking the projector is already close to that (I don't have it yet to test - next week I hope).
I want to light the maximum amount of phosphor on the raster with the sharpest image, but I'm just not sure if my first approach (no squeezing the raster, let the scaler do it all) is the best way to go.
Any thoughts/comments?