The digital boys are throwing down the gauntlet. How would we go about a subjective comparison using the forum? I personally think the only way to judge image quality is in person but ideas are welcome.
Screen shots mean nothing to me. Its so easy to sharpen and touchup screen shots in Photoshop its just not a very good gauge of picture quality. The real picture is what is important to me. I have seen some digital screen shots that look fantastic. Would I hang one in my theater?... Not right now thank you very much.
Yeah, and dig listening to my Anthrax CD through my mondo Pioneer receiver, my Koss power amplifier coupled to by dual 18" Cerwin Vega bandpass subs, temporarily taken out of my Honda CRX with the ground effects package.
What abot a study with a design as follows: Two almost identical hometheatersetups with as much variables controlled as possible; screen size, image footlamberts, same sound setups..same source (DVD??), same movies. The only factor differing, and the one to be examnied, the construction of the projector; CRT or digital. The discussion about what equipment to use here could be infinite...
A large group of subjects, homogenous in age,sex, cinematic experience and so on. I would just guess 500 would be required to show any kind of statistical significance that is greater than pure chance. These subjects are randomly selected for a A and B group.
The A and B groups are each shown a different order of the same movies on two different "schedules" of showings ( A: 1.CRT 2.digital...B: 1.digital, 2.CRT....). This to try to eliminate effects of "first HT experience". A and B groups are checked for statistical differences in distribution of age, sex movieexperience...they should be equal.
Now, all subjects would rate the movies for picture quality and maybe something more...
Some kind of staistical test is run on the ratings from the subjects...I think a simple t-test should make it, I forgot my statistics....Just thinking. The problem would of course be to find subjects and build two almost identical HT setups...But the study should be somewhat more controlled for influencing variables than lets say the Coca-cola vs Pepsi study. Maybe Barco would wanna sponsor.......
Finally, a reasonable response in this thread! Thank you ThomasW!
I own a CRT projector and from what I've seen of digital I don't regret my purchase at all. But I am dissappointed by the attitude that CRT produces a non-quantifiably superior picture. There may be a billion variables between systems, but the output does have some finite and measurable qualities. I, for one, would love to have some reputable information to point friends to when they ask me what they should consider when building a home theater.
I'm not sure this forum has the resources to marshall a full study as Thomas has suggested though. But I'm not sure I heard a good argument against the idea of close-up screen shots. Shoot, 10 years ago many of the ads for direct-view televisions had a close-up picture of the phosphor mask (remember pana-black?) It may be an after-effect of having built a home theater, but now every time I watch a movie (no matter where it is being screened) there are some specific details that I watch for (black level, shadow detail, screen door, scaling artifacts... etc.) What would be so bad about having a web page that had close-up photos showing what these details look like?
Same movie frame, same area of close-up, same screen-type, same camera taking the picture... etc... different projectors.
Whack, whack, damn horse! whack...I think its dead... Nope whack, whack whack.. Oh wait yes the horse was already dead. Whack whack...Whack.
cmon, it's dead, let it rest in peace.
Why are so many still trying to bring this up? If you can even afford a digital that can come close to a top crt, then you can surely afford to try them both. There is NO digital anywhere NEAR the same price point that even comes CLOSE to giving a really GOOD crt even a RUN for it's money.
Don't most ht magazines still compare all projectors to the likes of a xg135lc? I think they do.
Are there some great digitals, sure, if you don't count the price tag, life span, bulb cost, and drawbacks.
Why does Barco's new slogan say "CRT Forever"? I think they might know a thing or two.
It is to almost nobodys advantage to pay for or set uo the demo you speak of yet to this day.
Can you be happy with either? You bet. Which is better is still no contset and it's printed in magazines and articles and on barco's site. It's the digital folks asking for a comparison, because yes they are getting close, but still not in the same league.
Picture quality alone is not at all the only issue, and most issues don't show in screenshots.
Can we put a ban on all digital vs crt threads? Maybe a forum just for that that these threads all have to go to?
I have a 701s and a LCD. and while i only use the LCD for presentations and Movie rooms at SF Conventions... I could set it up to shoot the same source to the same screen, take pictures of the result with the same camera, locked to the same tripod with the same aperture and exposure... However, neither of my projectors are "state of the art"
But the cost vs quality is pretty big...
Barco 701s $550 with almost new tubes
View-Sonic PJ550 1999.00 New
PJ I prefer for movies... Barco, Hands down.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!