Joined
·
266 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness /forum/post/20842665
From the article:
"Equally as important, anamorphic optics consume about 10% of the projector's brightness while also reducing the contrast ratio. "
That's odd. Doesn't that go against prevailing wisdom of an Anamorphic lens allowing higher brightness? (I'm sure they are putting a spin to hype their non-lens solution).
So do I infer correctly that this projector resizes strictly via scaling, without any optical re-zooming? If so, I would infer that with this projector you set it up by zooming the image to fill your 2:35:1 screen and keep it there. Then, a 16:9 1080p image would be displayed full resolution, only using the central portion of the projector's panel, to appear in the middle of the screen (black side bars unprojected?). Switching to a scope movie, the image is re-scaled to full width of projector panel resolution.
This would mean a scope film would have somewhat higher brightness on this projector (since it's using the whole panel resolution) vs a similar projector based on 16:9 res, zoomed to the same width.
Also, does this suggest that brightness would...or would not change when switching between 16:9 and scope? (I'm having brain fog so the answer is not coming immediately to me).
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness /forum/post/20842665
From the article:
"Equally as important, anamorphic optics consume about 10% of the projector's brightness while also reducing the contrast ratio. "
That's odd. Doesn't that go against prevailing wisdom of an Anamorphic lens allowing higher brightness? (I'm sure they are putting a spin to hype their non-lens solution).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Horstkotte /forum/post/20842805
Maybe I'm missing something here - but it still doesn't seem quite like the holy grail until there are anamorphic Blu ray titles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx /forum/post/20843429
Anamorphic encoding will need anamorphic lenses for viewing.
What we need is wide screen encodes where the pixel mapping as we have now (1920 x 810) is encoded to 2560 x 1080.
Originally Posted by CAVX Yeah, you can say that is it is the same projector I saw at CEDIA 2010 at $45K |
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolrda /forum/post/20846035
I just don't see this as having an impact. I believe we'll move past this to 4k pretty quickly. Resolution drives the panel market and the projector market will follow. Even the new iPad 3 will have 2048x1536. Once I had seen 1080 source on a 2160 display I was sold. It'll drive the panel market then the studios will resell us all our blurays in 4k. We will begrudgingly replace our libraries yet again. This has repeatly happened and we have shown a willingness to adopt. This time won't be any different. Onkyo releasing receivers with 4k ability isn't just to one up competitors. If you buy a 4k tv you'll, need a 4k receiver.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolrda /forum/post/20846035
I just don't see this as having an impact. I believe we'll move past this to 4k pretty quickly. Resolution drives the panel market and the projector market will follow. Even the new iPad 3 will have 2048x1536. Once I had seen 1080 source on a 2160 display I was sold. It'll drive the panel market then the studios will resell us all our blurays in 4k. We will begrudgingly replace our libraries yet again. This has repeatly happened and we have shown a willingness to adopt. This time won't be any different. Onkyo releasing receivers with 4k ability isn't just to one up competitors. If you buy a 4k tv you'll, need a 4k receiver.