[dogone]

I thought this was a pretty good question considering that several 1080P projectors have between 1600 and 2500 lumens...Why wouldn't a projector company bring out a 3D projector with like 2000-2500 lumens...It doesn't seem like it would be a big deal to build one that would have a setting for 3D with a high lumen mode and then another mode for 2D where it would kick down to around 1000 or so. Anyone really know why?...I really expected LG to come out with a more affordable 3D projector with around 1800-2000 lumens...

 

[pottscb]

Everyone overstates their lumen rating, except JVC, who did up their lumens in the new 3D models. When you dial back this 3000 lumen projectors for accurate color, they come in about 10% under the JVC because JVC they refuse to print lies on their box to sell more units.

 

[zombie10k]



Quote:
Originally Posted by pottscb /forum/post/19505690


Everyone overstates their lumen rating, except JVC, who did up their lumens in the new 3D models. When you dial back this 3000 lumen projectors for accurate color, they come in about 10% under the JVC because JVC they refuse to print lies on their box to sell more units.

there may be some irony this time around with the JVC... another member measured a near production model X7 at 537 lumens in 3D mode, nowhere near the stated 1300 of the projector.

 

[Toe]



Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k /forum/post/19505753


there may be some irony this time around with the JVC... another member measured a near production model X7 at 537 lumens in 3D mode, nowhere near the stated 1300 of the projector.

The 1300 lumen rating is for uncalibrated 2d mode according to Ekki.........where is the irony? JVC never claimed that the 1300 figure was for 3d from my reading, no?


My question though is how much will the 3d lumens improve next gen on the JVCs and Sony? Anybodys guess, but it will be interesting to see.

 

[omicronian]

There's something wrong, the numbers don't add up. I think it's possible there's problem with light reading equipment in 3D. If it reads 537 to the screen, it should be around 90 through the glasses, while his reading was 176. Nearly twice, which may or may not be a coincidence, it's exactly what would happen if the light was kept polarized instead of bouncing off a depolarizing screen.


I don't know how this works, what's the procedure to make a light reading ? Do you bounce the light off a screen or do you read the light coming from the projector just before it reaches the actual screen ?

 

[Toe]



Quote:
Originally Posted by omicronian /forum/post/19506244


There's something wrong, the numbers don't add up. I think it's possible there's problem with light reading equipment in 3D. If it reads 537 to the screen, it should be around 90 through the glasses, while his reading was 176. Nearly twice, which may or may not be a coincidence, it's exactly what would happen if the light was kept polarized instead of bouncing off a depolarizing screen.


I don't know how this works, what's the procedure to make a light reading ? Do you bounce the light off a screen or do you read the light coming from the projector just before it reaches the actual screen ?

Maybe Ekki can step in and explain, but he did mention the JVC looses half its light through the glasses and half through the screen(?) while the Sony (and I assume Mits, Acer, etc...) loose ALL their light through the glasses.

 

[omicronian]

I think its interesting to talk about the fact that linear polarizers don't work on modern cameras. The reason given is that the auto exposure, which is essentially an integrated light meter in the camera, doesn't work correctly with linear polarized light, it won't give correct readings, and your exposure will be messed up.


The JVC outputs linear polarized light

The glasses are polarizing the light linearly

I assume an expensive external light reader doesn't have a problem with polarization, but you never know... the reading could be twice or half the real value

 

[mark haflich]

Omni. If the machine is put out 1300 in 3D mode, I would expect through the glasses from a non polarizing preserving screen to be about 16% of that, or a little above 200. How you measure this I have no idea. But the loss isn`t entirely due to the glasses. Somewhat over have the loss occurs because of the 3D sequential output counting time of each image on the screen. The glasses further reduce this due to the pol;arizer built into the glasses, the tint, and the tome the lens is open is less than the time the image is being flashed.

 

[Jason Turk]



Quote:
Originally Posted by dogone /forum/post/19505465


I thought this was a pretty good question considering that several 1080P projectors have between 1600 and 2500 lumens...Why wouldn't a projector company bring out a 3D projector with like 2000-2500 lumens...It doesn't seem like it would be a big deal to build one that would have a setting for 3D with a high lumen mode and then another mode for 2D where it would kick down to around 1000 or so. Anyone really know why?...I really expected LG to come out with a more affordable 3D projector with around 1800-2000 lumens...

What models do you think are actually 1600 to 2500? In this class...none...most are marketing garbage.

 

[dogone]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Turk /forum/post/19508986


What models do you think are actually 1600 to 2500? In this class...none...most are marketing garbage.

Really?...wouldn't they be liable for such a disception?

 

[Jason Turk]

Nope. For example, I can make the JVC HD250/RS10/RS15 put out 1500+ lumens...not hard to do. But you wouldn't want to watch it that way. Basically a lot of the companies setup specific test standards, not in a way that one would actually use it, in order to acheive a goal number.

 

[dogone]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Turk /forum/post/19509045


Nope. For example, I can make the JVC HD250/RS10/RS15 put out 1500+ lumens...not hard to do. But you wouldn't want to watch it that way. Basically a lot of the companies setup specific test standards, not in a way that one would actually use it, in order to acheive a goal number.

So then if one was not that picky about having a calibrated unit, you could theoretically squeak out more lumens for 3D...such as animated features and such?

 

[mark haflich]

Damn. Jason did JVC tell you where the nuclear torch mode was in the service menu.


Seriously, as Jason said, you can raise the temperature to get more light but the word isn`t being too picky, its making the colors so bad even a blind man would see the errors and couldn`t tolerate them.

 

[dogone]



Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19509094


Damn. Jason did JVC tell you where the nuclear torch mode was in the service menu.


Seriously, as Jason said, you can raise the temperature to get more light but the word isn`t being too picky, its making the colors so bad even a blind man would see the errors and couldn`t tolerate them.

I said 'squeak' out a few more lumens, not blind someone that may already be blind...

 

[Anthony A.]



Quote:
Originally Posted by dogone /forum/post/19505465


I thought this was a pretty good question considering that several 1080P projectors have between 1600 and 2500 lumens...Why wouldn't a projector company bring out a 3D projector with like 2000-2500 lumens...It doesn't seem like it would be a big deal to build one that would have a setting for 3D with a high lumen mode and then another mode for 2D where it would kick down to around 1000 or so. Anyone really know why?...I really expected LG to come out with a more affordable 3D projector with around 1800-2000 lumens...

if they offer the best thing today, how can they sell you the better thing tomorrow? its typical consumer electronics. next year they can offer more lumens and more people will upgrade. the technology has been there for years, the same way electric cars were developed 20 years ago. its all about money. don't lose sleep over it. tomorrows pj will be better and the one you bought today is only worth 20% of what you paid for it.

 

[mark haflich]

There is evolution and refinement and it is not conspiracy based.


A famous Secretary of State once asked a staffer to prepare a paper. The guy took 3 months and turned it in. The Secretary of State called him in 2 weeks later and holding the paper asked if that was the best he could do, He said yes with the time and staff allocated to it. The Secretary of State asked can you do better. The guy said yes but it will take more time and resources. The Secretary of State said fine. Do it. Three weeks later he came back and turned a better paper in. A week later the Secretary of State called him back in and had the same discussion. The guy went back and a week later turned a little better paper in. A few days later the Secretary of State called him in. The Secretary of State asked is this really the best you can do. The guy said YES DAMN IT. Its the best i can do. The Secretary of State said fine, now I will read it.

 

[dogone]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony A. /forum/post/19509358


if they offer the best thing today, how can they sell you the better thing tomorrow? its typical consumer electronics. next year they can offer more lumens and more people will upgrade. the technology has been there for years, the same way electric cars were developed 20 years ago. its all about money. don't lose sleep over it. tomorrows pj will be better and the one you bought today is only worth 20% of what you paid for it.

Yeah...I'm aware of this scenario...I was just hoping I could have been wrong... Kinda makes me wanna just say, screw it!...I'll wait till next year...That way, "they pay" not me...

I guess we're all to blame for letting it happen to us by buying into it...

 

[Craig Peer]



Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Turk

What models do you think are actually 1600 to 2500? In this class...none...most are marketing garbage.

Really?...wouldn't they be liable for such a disception?

Ha ha ha - you must be new around here. Forget lumens, some of these contrast numbers are pure fiction too. You really need to read a trusted review from a qualified reviewer to get the truth about projector performance these days.

 

[Victor]

I'm curious is it that hard to put 400W UHP lamp in those units for the pricepoint they already in? Sony did it with VW100 and Xenon, why Sony or JVC can't do the same with UHP and a new generation of the projectors? Why 200+W is the magic lamp power rating everybody use?

 

[mark haflich]

How many lumens did Sony get out for their 400 Watt lamp?


Its got something to so with the thermal package, the chassis size, the noise yada yada.