AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,066 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I thought I'd post this before one of you experimenters finds out anyway! An anamorphic lens that compresses in normal operation will expand if it is reversed. This is impractical in many cases since this means the light is going in the large end and coming out the small end, so consequently much is cut off. However, the Panamorph entrance aperture is so large that some will find they can successfully do this. In other words, by rotating it front to back and then rotating 90 degrees around the optical axis, you can expand the image horizontally (and variably)with a constant height. However, since the Panamorph is designed to work with the off-axis nature of the projector, one side will not be as sharp as the other. It will also look pretty strange to have a sideways Panamorph on the ceiling, but I thought some might want to play with this before installing.


------------------

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,092 Posts
Shawn,


I had thought of the exact same thing, but thought that it would be blurry or distorted or something.


Please don't take this next question the wrong way, but why didn't you design it like this?


I think most of us would prefer horizontal expansion over vertical compression. Most of us prefer to have our 16:9 stuff wider than our 4:3 and with the bypass option this would be rather easy.


As it stands now, if you have a 16:9 screen and you want full res image in the center, you have to slide the panamorph over and zoom the image in.


It won't really matter to me because I plan to do all of my watching the panamorph permenantly attached. I "pilar-box" my 4:3 material going into the projector.


Anyway, thanks for the idea.


-Mr. Wigggles


------------------

The Mothership is now boarding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,129 Posts
Hmmmm. Would an input lens of 1.75" clear? I wonder if...



------------------

The button is labeled "Play", not "Pay". STOP the MPAA!

Our Silent Angels

Please visit The Manny Page!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,066 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Wigggles, due to the off-axis nature of projection systems, nature favors vertical compression over the horizontal expansion approach for performance, especially when large apertures are required. The other issue is that there are many projection systems already installed, so the vertical compression is seemingly an easier mode to retrofit.


------------------

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
806 Posts
Shawn,


Why don't you allow this for the 2.35 panamorph. The throw distances are getting a little out there and this would allow more users to partake. Many people just don't have the depth, (I'm borderline myself). I've preordered one to try but it would make my decision much easier if you could at least try to optimize this.


As per your comment about already installed theaters, when you come out with the 2.35, many will be buying wider screens, (not shorter ones). If you really are concerned about current installations, that would indicate a preference for half expand horizontally, half shrink vertically.


Your thoughts?


Phil



Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,837 Posts
re: "If you really are concerned about current installations, that would indicate a preference for half expand horizontally, half shrink vertically."


...Then we wouldn't have a constant height *or* a constant width system! I think Cygus did the Right Thing. If you want a constant height, variable width setup (CHVW), get a pair of ISCO's. Cygnus filled the market void for CWVH, giving us a pair of Panamorphs.


I want a product optimized for one system or the other (CWVH or CHVW), not a product with compromises in optical performance to try to appease both approaches. I want a stable full of sleek winning thoroughbreds, not a camel (a horse designed by a committee!).


(No offense to camel owners! After viewing Lawrence of Arabia last week, I would want a camel for desert survival any day over a triple crown winner http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,587 Posts
Shawn

I am curious about the variable compression of the Panamorph. As you have stated before, by varying the

tilt we can vary the squeeze (compression). Are there any linearity problems introduced by varying the tilt

between the rated (1:65 - 1:85) ratio's the Panamorph can handle ?

Is the focusing effected ?

Any other notations ?


These may be silly to some, but I am looking at a few optional setups for the future.



DavidW
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top