[catullus]

I have not placed an order for a Panamorph. I am not on a waiting list. If I ordered now, as a brand new customer, how long would I have to wait? I know what MANY people are ahead of me, tens of millions probably


If it will take a year or two for delivery, then so many 16x9 projectors will be out that the Panamorph may be close to obsolete.


Mike


[This message has been edited by catullus (edited 08-11-2001).]

 

[Shawn Kelly]

Hi Mike. In case you haven't seen all the history, the reason there is a long line is that the Panamorph program began as a seed on this forum even before product design and was actually sponsored in part by many of these great people. So the Panamorph has evolved through all the stages (and pain) of a new high-tech product to get to production. To justify the program as a business endeavor, we have developed (and are still refining) a substantial manufacturing operation and will soon be promoting the Panamorph to the industry and market at large. For perspective, if we were at full capacity we could manufacture and ship enough units to fill all the forum orders from the past year in about two weeks. It will still be a couple months before we get there, but the bottom line is that if you order in the near term you will probably get your unit in late September.


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[David Wallis]

I agree I think Cygnus should be marketing this for both 1:33 to 1:78 and 1:78 to 2:35 conversion.

The 33% brightness and pixel resolution gains apply in both the "1:33 to 1:78" and the "1:78 to 2:35" conversion.

Aprox 43% of movies are 2:35 so you are talking a lot of discs you can gain on.


No more 2:35 milky black bars when using a native 1:78 digital projector as well as a 33% gain in brightness and pixel density.


This way many owners and potential buyers can see that the 1:78 Panamorph has a long term future not a short one.


DavidW

 

[Shawn Kelly]

That's a good point on using the Panamorph with a 16:9 projector for 2.35:1. I just didn't want to add confusion at this point with the additional requirement of an electronic vertical prestretch. However, if we are "projecting" out a couple years, it certainly may be the case that OEMs or third parties provide this capability (though I suspect HTPC/YXY can already do it, though perhaps not optimumly).


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[Carey P]

Shawn,


I could be wrong, but I thought special scaling was only necessary for the Panamorph 2, in order to stretch the 2.35 to full 4:3 panel before squeezing.


With a 16:9 panel, I thought there was an "unsqueezed" setting like most 4:3 projectors have, which does not do the anamorphic squeeze. Guess the 10HT people should know best. Otherwise, if the projector forced the squeeze to keep everything within its panel, then you could be right about needing a scaler/HTPC to counteract it.


Carey

 

[Carey P]

Quote:

If it will take a year or two for delivery, then so many 16x9 projectors will be out that the Panamorph may be close to obsolete.

Not true. You can still use it for 2.35:1 movies, of which there are plenty!


I'm surprised at you Shawn for not pointing this out. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


Carey


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

My forever in-progress Home Theatre

 

[David Wallis]

I could be wrong here but would you not just use the letterbox mode of a 1:78 native projector ?

According to me this will give you the 25% increase in height showing a 2:35A disc.

Things might get tricky for a letterbox 2:35 though unles the projector has custom scaling like my Dwin or the Selecos. But I think that all 1:78 projectors will be able to use the Panamorph for native 2:35 showing.

I do not expect we will ever get a native 2:35 projector in our life time.


DavidW

 

[arrow]

I've said this before and I'll say it again...


I'm VERY CONFIDENT that I'll have mine by 2005. Wait! 2006.


--Les (who Shawn just moved down the list for that last crack) http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

[Shawn Kelly]

Carey & David, I don't think there is a natural configuration for using an anamorphic lens with a 16:9 projector and 2.35 content. Today's anamorphic DVDs are only vertically stretched to 133%, regardless of the format of the content. So the simple options with a 16:9 projector are to either watch the letterbox 2.35 version with huge black bars or the anamorphic 2.35 version with smaller but still significant black bars, both without the Panamorph. However, if the HTPC, scaler or projector have the capability of performing an additional 133% vertical stretch, then the Panamorph will do its thing. My understanding is that some 16:9 projectors already do this, which at first glance seems to reflect remarkable foresight by the OEMs. What would be even more interesting is if the DVD community simply made 2.35 movies with the full vertical stretch and then allowed the DVD player to decode the content for a given display. I can't think of any reason why they could not or should not do this with no added expense for new releases and I think everybody would win.


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[robena]

Shawn,


That would be dreadful for people not having a 2.35 device! The 2.35 to 1.77 downconversion artifacts would be just as bad as the current 1.77 to 1.33 ones.

People using currently not 1.77 capable viewing devices are generally not critical viewers, and 1.77 is the future, so providing 1.77 anamorphic DVDs is an excellent choice. Providing 2.35 anamorphics DVDs would strand out the vast majority of users.

Unless of course the scaling technology improves enough to avoid these artifacts.


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

Robert

 

[Shawn Kelly]

Robert, you're right in that I'm assuming good scaling technology will eventually become pervasive so that down-converting from a higher-res source should be similar to current quality at the same level. .


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[David Wallis]

If we had a third anamorphic encoded format such as 2:35, the big benefit is that we would get to use the whole 480 pixels for the 2:35 image. Your projector or Tv can then squeeze it down, without any need for downconversion. Downconversion is only needed if your projector or tv can not do the squeeze.


Remember we are still talking the same 480 that we have in a 1:33 or anamorphic 1:78 disc. The frame of a 2:35 image both anamorphic and letterbox is the same size as 1:33 frame, its just got big black bars if its letterbox, or smaller black bars if its anamorphic, but its still 480 its just that we do not use all of these 480 pixels for a 2:35 image.

Always think of anamorphic as a distorted 1:33 image as it all relates to a 1:33 frame.

We could easy have this option! All we need is to just squeeze it with our display device and we can then display all 480 pixels avaliable from a Dvd.


Now if your display can not do this squeeze then like early 1:33 tvs (that could not do this squeeze) you would then need to downconvert in you Dvd player (ie tell the player your tv can not squeeze like we do now with old 1:33 sets).

If you had say a 1:78 tv you would just do double the amount of squeeze on the tv, so you would not need to down convert in the Dvd player.

MPEG-2 actually does have a 2:21:1 optional squeeze rate it the specs but it iis not being used "much to our detriment".


Shawn on the extra expansion needed for 1:78 native projectors (with a 2:35 image). Dvd players such as the Panasonic RP-91 and the Malata N-996 and some Jvc models should do this stretch from at least a 2:35A disc. So a native 1:78 projector should be able to use the P752 for 1:78 to 2:35 conversion thus giving a 33% gain pretty cheaply.


The interesting thing here is that the cheap Malata Dvd player has a custom form of YXY inbuilt. Very handy for Panamorph conversion lens customers. Especially those who do not want to remove the lens for 1:33 discs or images.

My freind who has the Panamorph is going to try it later on a Sony 10/11Ht and the Sanyo PLV-60 to see if any of these native 1:78 units can do the 2:35 stretch.


I think that from what I have seen the Sony will, but it is a zoom thing. So it might be some sort of cropping going on. Not sure about what the Sanyo will allow.

This needs to be followed up with all the Dvd players mentioned and the native 1:78 projectors. I am sure there is a solution here somewhere.


Perhaps you should start a bit of a list on what will and will not work with different equipment and the Panamorph.

Many here on AVS could help confirm what works and what doesn't.



DavidW




[This message has been edited by David Wallis (edited 08-12-2001).]

 

[Mark Hunter]

Shawn,


I just wanted to say that it's great to have you participating in the Panamorph related threads!


That's all.

 

[Shawn Kelly]

David, I remember a previous thread stating that the Sanyo PLV-60 could already handle this. It will be interesting to see how many OEMs include the additional stretch feature.


Mark, I'm happy to engage this type of discussion every once in a while when I'm not solving manufacturing issues. However, Larry and Dean are right, I need to get the P561 (the 2.35 lens) out of prototyping.


The P561 is based on the P752 technology to exploit all the lessons learned. The primary difference is three prisms instead of two. I wish I could shrink it just a bit more, but it's time to start fixing things. I'm 95% hands off the P752 at this point, so I'll be able to begin wrapping things up on P561 this week to go into production including a preproduction status report. We will certainly have another open house dedicated to the P561 so that local members can provide some prototype feedback.


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[videohot]

It would be really great if various formats could be anamorphically produced for all OAR's then the players could decide how to dispay them. Anyone know if there is some limitation in the DVD coding that wouldn't allow this? Various flags for any aspect ratio. Apparently all DVD players have some scaling built into them in order to get the basic anamorphic vs non anamorphic display. The players may need updating that may be true.


Are we looking at other "special editions" of DVD's at some point (in this case I'd get em again for this!) I admit it...I have every known remaster/reissue/boxed set of Led Zepplin. I do fall for it!


Larry





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

DFAST is EVIL! BOYCOTT ANTI-CONSUMER 5C/DVI/HDCP/DMCA MANUFACTURERS!

Join Electronic Freedom Foundation
http://www.eff.org/

 

[David Wallis]

Shawn

I just think that at least knowledge of what works and what does't will be of benefit to people considering buying the Panamorph.


Great news about the 2:35 lens. Will this be shown at Cedia or has time blown out with the 1:78 lens issues ?


By the way my first home viewing of the Panamorph on my freinds G15 went very very well. I have his lens tonight to try on my Dlp. I think he is a bit nervous i might not return it because he was hanging on pretty tight when he gave me the box. I will report my full feelings on the Panamorph tommorow.



DavidW


[This message has been edited by David Wallis (edited 08-12-2001).]

 

[Dean McManis]

Shawn,


Thanks for the info. I'll be eagerly awaiting the news from the upcoming P561 prototype party, and reading the P561 update news.


Like many of the folks here, I now have one of the NEC LT-150s and it will be interesting to see how this works with the P561 as well as my G15.


-Dean.

 

[Shawn Kelly]

David, thanks for the advance feedback on your review! As far as CEDIA, nothing has been decided yet on how Panamorph will be represented at the show. There are still a number of distribution questions that need to be answered first. However, I certainly expect to be in production of the P561 by that time. I will definitely go to the show and will have both P752 and P561 units with me.


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

Shawn Kelly

Cygnus Imaging
www.cgns.com

 

[Alan Gouger]

I am currently using the Panamorph combined with the isco for my 235:1 movies.


Until the P561 ships you cannot pry this combo from my hands. I am using the seleco ht200 and there are no pixels visible at 8 feet wide and plenty of light output as well. Razor sharp focus.


Mark Hunter/Milori and Tom Strade/Tommyboy2 got to see this combo for a few minutes at my home this past weekend.


Once you've seen the improvement you will never go back to watching 235:1 black bared again.


I am looking forward to the P561 and think it will be a big hit amongst the purist.


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

Alan Gouger

Thanks for supporting AV Science.
www.avscience.com


[This message has been edited by Alan Gouger (edited 08-12-2001).]

 

[drmyeyes]

Alan Gouger said-


"Once you've seen the improvement you will never go back to watching 2.35:1 black barred again."


Totally agree.


While you may have to wait for your 2.35 lens, you can enjoy unblack barred 2.35 right now, simply by ordering a 2.35 screen and properly masking the black bands, however you like. Then when the lens comes out, you're set.


I'm doing it now with a single ISCO II, which, of course does leave residual black bands on 2.35 material. I had masking applied to the screen as additional black vinyl above and below the active picture area. The result is large, invisibly barred 2.35. With a bright projector (VT540) and a high gain screen (Dalite) it's most impressive. It even works without the ISCO.


"Once you've seen the improvement you will never go back to watching 2.35:1 black barred again."




[This message has been edited by drmyeyes (edited 08-12-2001).]