Posted on 12/06/2004 11:15:57 AM PST by ambrose
Oh, lamp costs are between $20 and $35 for lamps that last 20,000 hours instead of $295 - $500 for lamps that last 1000 to 2000 hours. More expensive lamps can go for 4000 hours... but that still translates as only 2.5 years or so before you gotta buy a lamp (If you ignore the steady reduction in lumen output!)
Incidentally, the keystone controls on most projectors are digital... they make the changes in screen dimensions digitally. The Lumenlab design does it optically.
The ones I have been looking at use three separate monochrome LCD's and one panasonic unit has almost no screendoor effect. I am getting the feeling these homemade ones use full color lcd's designed for laptops and hand-held devices. Is that correct? And if so, is there not a resolution hit?
I can't say. Defective pressing plants (and there were numerous companies that used them) have been identifed in the lore of LD.
Even Criterions Plus $100 releases (retail) were prone to laser rot. Not all discs were, some plants were bad. Don't know if it was glue, loading docks, etc.
It is real. Some have already claimed to witness laser rot in CDs and DVDs (visible holes that impair playback). I believe that would be different because a laserdisc is essentially an LP sized CD glued to another LP sized CD. I have seen a few bootleg CDs that were "double sided" but have not seen this as any sort of industry standard. Some believe that poor sealant, etc. led to laser rot at some companies.
That doesn't sound right... at 11 feet for a 65" screen, it covered pretty much my entire field of vision (and I have good peripheral vision). The THX standard would recommend 8 2/3 feet by that formula -- the screen would literally seem too large to be completely seen at that distance from my empirical experience.
That looks way cool. What skill level would be required to actually do one of those projects?
I scare...EVERYONE, bay-bee! It's just....MY scary talent. It...SCARES...a lot of folks.
(Walken exits thread to peppy song and dance number.)
If you're a Star Trek fan, get a copy of the director's version of ST 4. It has a special feature where Leonard Nimoy (the director) demonstrates the difference between the two formats, using the scene where Kirk, Spock and the whale biologist (played by Catherine Hicks) are in her pickup truck.
I love the widescreen format and buy all my movies in it, but my parents can't stand it - they hate the bars on the TV screen. It's just a matter of preference.
I am a budding electronics geek! I shop for electronics goodies constantly even if I am not buying I still go to electronics stores to look at the latest stuff.
I have noticed that the selections of TVs in these stores is starting to edge more and more to widescreen. In fact many of the Electronics stores I go to have MORE widescreen TVs than regular 4:3 screens. Yes they are still expensive mostly (Though you can find many for around 700-800 bucks) but consider that the prices are dropping rapidly it figures that in the next 5 years the 4:3 screen will be the exception rather than the rule.
BTW if anyone is looking for a new widescreen TV I suggest forgoing Plasma and taking a look at DLP or LED. I Purchased a JVC HD-52Z585 that has a stunning picture and unlike Plasma when the picture starts to fade you can replace a bulb rather than buy a whole new TV again.
Oh, and if widesceen TVs become the norm then FULL Screen DVDs will show black bars on the sides of your screen unless you use the STRETCH setting (Usually called Panorama) I hate FULL SCREEN it sucks to the MAX!
Hey... thanks.
Depends on the content. El Mariachi I'd much rather see full-frame than letterboxed, since it was shot on 16mm with video transfer in mind. The letterboxed DVD often crops the top and bottom quite inappropriately.
Actually, they use 13"-15" (some are using up to 19" 16:9 with aspect ratio) desk top LCD screens with full resolution - SVGA - XVGA. We use extremely high quality fresnel lenses, and a high quality triplet projection lens. The LCD screens are stripped of the backlights. Some project makers are building miniature projectors using 7" SVGA screens with. Most commercial home projectors are VGA 800 X 600 rez. Laptops can be used but they have Flat Flexible Cable issues that make them less than ideal.
The images project excellently, and are slightly defocused internally (not noticeable) to eliminate any possible screen-door effect. The 400W lamps produce 32,000 to 40,000 Lumen, which results in a projected image between 1100 - 1600 lumen depending on the number of elements used in the projector (the LCD screen and its polarized filters absorbs 80%).
Never-the-less, that is the formula... Your 11 feet is still within the acceptable range. At 65" diagonally, your screen is only 52" wide horizontally. Your peripheral vision should be a lot more than that.
Some of the builders have never built anything before in their lives. One very successful projector was built by a 13 year old boy.
My personal preference is to get the movie/show in the aspect ratio it was originally shot in, whether that means 4:3, 16:9, 2.35:1, or anything else that may be out there.
Films are shot with a certain amount of tolerance on framing; directors' viewfinders are marked with a rectangle giving the minimum amount a theater can show and be considered "properly" set up. There's a fair range of latitude on how a DVD can be framed and conform to that. Within that range, do you prefer tighter or looser scaling and cropping? In particular, if the film records an image which extends vertically beyond what some theater screens will show, is it better to show the extra (since it's there and the screen real estate is there) or crop it?
Also, btw, one feature I've wished my otherwise-well-featured DVD player had: a 95% out-zoom. I think my TV has a fair amount of overscan, and some DVDs of older movies (which were shot with an Academy ratio frame) have 'meaningful content' extend beyond the edges of the screen (another feature would be able to pan the zoom--I don't know why they put in zooming in 1% increments and didn't allow panning; weird). OTOH, the ability to have audio on the 2x fast-forward is very handy, and I do like the player in a lot of other ways. So I'll just live with the fact I can't have everything.
I would imagine the correct answer is "whichever way the director framed the shot".
Given that most director viewfinders are now marked with inner and outer rectangles for "what's guaranteed to appear in a properly-adjusted theater" and "what might appear in a properly-adjusted theater", whereabouts do you prefer things wihthin that tolerance?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.