Spiky

That's pretty tight. I think you're either going to have to decide to make the screen bigger or put the PJ on the wall in the main room. That would make it about 20" closer, enough to get down to your 106" desired size.

Unless....you could probably put the screen closer since it is an occasional-use pull down setup.

X

The same room would make it very easy. But I won't have to worry about noise or looks in the adjacent room and it would almost totally eliminate wire clutter by using a computer in that room to drive it. All I'd have to run to my receiver would be a coax cable for sound.

It would be difficult but I maybe could bring the screen closer. It's a big open room and the only bit of wall is that 17' away. Unfortunately it would mean it's also closer to the seating area.

An unzoom lens (or whatever it's called) would be the perfect solution. I think I'll check into whether they exist.

Sdallnct

Not sure what you mean. Typically there are lenes that are zooms or fixed. Some will argue the best of the fixed is sharper then the best of zooms (less glass, simple design). However you give up a LOT of flexibility as now you have to move the PJ or screen to change image size even a small amount.

Some PJ's have lens "shift". This enables you to fix keystoning and make slight movements side to side and/or up or down mechanically. This evidently results in a better picture then using the software in the PJ.

X

What I was thinking about was a lens that would do the opposite of zoom. It would make the picture smaller. I got the projector today and from what I can tell so far, you can't have the projector behind you. The SDE shows that way.

I forgot I had an identical but somewhat reverse environment downstairs that allows me to test there using the same distances I would have upstairs. It appears my projector is up to spec and the minimum screen size I'd be able to use would be 97" across. I wanted 96" across.

I'm actually underwhelmed with the picture from the projector. It's big, sharp, colors are great, even its uncalibrated picture looks very nice. However pixels are very noticeable to me and I can see that I really prefer an analog picture. (That's probably why I hate plasma). The amount of distance away I would have to sit from the screen to smooth out the picture would make the effective field of view about the same as my current 53" RPTV from 7-8' away and I think I like its analog, film-like picture better. There's more detail with the projector, but I can see that's not everything.

I only had a white wall to work with so I don't know if a screen would change my opinion; I have to do more testing. I always thought I'd have to go with a CRT projector. I think my Pioneer Elite spoiled me. Bah.

Slayer2005

X, a slight defocus will take care of the pixels if you can't sit at the proper distance. This is a trick that lots of people have done. It seems to be a lost art. . Also there is an IMX lens that'll get rid of them, but it's about $400, so I just do a slight defocus if I can't sit the proper distance (which is generally 2X the width of the screen for a 480p unit).

Also, if you want to make the image smaller I hear a telephoto lens will do the trick. For those with small rooms (people who want a bigger image) a wide angle camera lens can give you a 50% bigger image.

Spiky

A grey screen could help and so can the focus trick. But the real way to get rid of SDE is to be farther away, have a smaller screen, or have more pixels. This is why I was determined to get an HD res PJ. I couldn't stand the SDE and didn't want to have a "small" screen size. I was agonizing for months, even over HD models, as to whether I could sit at 1.5-1.8x width like I do.

Comparing the 480p PJs I looked at in stores, both LCD and DLP, I saw more SDE on those at 10' (90-100" screens) than I do at 2' on my 720p DLP (90" screen).

As Slayer said, try a telephoto lens. Maybe one of those digicam add-on lenses. Panasonic, Canon and some others have these as options for some of their cameras. An SLR lens would most likely be too small and not designed properly to pull this off.

Slayer2005

Which 720p unit do you have Spiky? I'm wanting a 720p DLP, but I'll most likely hold out until next year when a 1080p DLP is supposed to be released for $6k. That should send great 720p units like the H79 way down in price. I heard it could go as low as $2,000 sometime next year. That would be fantastic. If the H79 reaches that low of a price next year that means the good LCD units like the AE900/Z4 will be at ridicuously low prices. Probably $1,200-$1,500. Next year should be interesting that's for sure.

I'm also kind of hoping such a low price tag for a great 720p DLPs and a 1080p DLPs will drive down the prices of great 8" and 9" CRT EM Focus LC projectors to an all time low. . I would love to upgrade my ECP 4500+ CRT.

X

Thanks for the suggestions.

I know of defocusing but haven't tried it yet. That may solve a couple problems. Haven't heard of an IMX lens. I'll look into it if only for curiosity sake.

The projector is actually quite impressive for the price. It's very quiet when in low light mode. The normal mode doesn't give all that much more light but does make it sound like a vacuum cleaner. The picture was very detailed and it's surprising since I was just driving it with a $20 Cyberhome player via interlaced component. The Faroudja deinterlacing circuitry is really impressive.

And thanks for giving the kind of lens I'm looking for a name. I suppose I was having trouble figuring out what to call it because projector terminology calls zooming the opposite of what it does in camera terminology and I was thinking I certainly didn't want to zoom any more than it already does. I know about long throw lenses but certainly don't want to get into the kind of cost that involves. I'm doing some research on telephotos now.

I also agree with getting more, smaller pixels But I just wanted to get some experience with a inexpensive projector first. There's a $10K Sony coming out that sounds like it would be just what I will want and I might be interested when its price drops. That is, if I don't end up with a CRT.

Spiky

I've got the Toshiba MT700, clone of the BenQ 7700, $2500. Very nice unit, as long as the lamps don't crap out. The Darkchip 3 units are out, and at least one (Mits HC900, IIRC) is under $3k. That would be very nice, but I will be waiting quite some time before upgrading again. By then it will almost certainly be 1080p.

I would think something like these for a lens. Attaching it would be a trick.

X

Looks like it's going to be difficult to find a very small telephoto, around 1.1 or 1.2x. People generally wouldn't bother with that small for a camera.

X

I spent some more time with the projector. I really do like the detail of what you can see when the picture is 110" and over so maybe I'll just give up on the telephoto lens.

I put the crappy Cyberhome player into progressive and I like the picture even better. I thought the Faroudja processing was supposed to be superior but it doesn't look like it to me. The picture looked darker in interlaced so maybe I need to recalibrate for each setting to get a better comparison.

I checked out the IMX lens and it really looks like a winner. Slightly defocusing didn't work for me; I just don't like it.

So maybe if I get a grey screen (I was looking at HCMW ones, they are somewhat grey, aren't they?) and the SDE still bothers me I can add on an IMX lens.

Does anyone know what the gain would be considered to be of a textured flat white wall?

Spiky

Perfect white with a bit of reflectiveness ought to be a 1.0. Flat wall paint is probably between .8 and 1.0.

Slayer2005

I believe you are referring to the Sony Ruby.

The great thing about your new unit is that you haven't seen the best it has to offer yet. Trust me.

I got mine today and have been playing with it for several hours. HTPC is definitely the way to go. Screen Door Effect is bad even from 2X when completely infocus (mainly on bright scenes, esepcially with bright white or text), but a slight defocus takes care of it for the most part. I then sharpen with FFDShow which gives near HD like sharpness to go along with the smoother picture. I tweaked out the searing whites with FFDShow and by the end of tweaking I ended up getting a pretty smooth, high contrast image with rich natural colors. The blacks, contrast and colors are a big improvement over the X1. I can't believe someone on another forum dared to say "they're basically the same unit.". The 4805 seems to have worse SDE than my X1 though even when I ran the X1's 16:9 portion at the same size. Odd.

Anyway, I'm running mine on about a 10 gain silver Torus (curved horizontally and vertically) and I'm getting Plasma like brightness at 9ft diagonal. I actually turned the contrast down to zero at one point. I now keep it at about 15, becase this screen is BRIGHT.

I'll post some screenshots with plenty of ambient light soon. I got amazing results with light present. For the money this thing is definitely amazing. I was thinking about making an 80" RP set out of this unit since I have a CRT already, but I'm getting RPTV like results on my Torus, so I don't know if I will or not.

BTW X, if you're interested in that IMX lens if can be had at the lowest price on AVSForum. They are having a powerbuy. I believe it's about $395. However, if you can get an HTPC and FFDShow running you absolutely will not need it. Simple defocus and FFDShow unsharpen will give you a smoother pic with near HD sharpness.

X, one thing I haven't discovered is how to change the modes. Mine didn't come with a manual. I tried searching for it, but couldn't find it (although I didsn't search for very long. ).

Spiky

Slayer,
That sounds like a perfect candidate for a $25 ND2 filter tweak. Best part is you can remove it in a second if you need lights on for the Super Bowl party or whatever.

Slayer2005

I don't know how different the effect is but I put a polarizer sheet infront of the lens (it cuts off about 56% of light) and I didn't like the effect. The blacks didn't really seem better. It just made the image a lot dimmer. How would an ND filter differ?

I think I'd make a DIY iris before I go the ND route (that way I at least get improved contrast along with my decreased brightness). .

I'm digging the plasma like brightness though with my super high gain screen. I actually think I may be getting the brightness of a 42" plasma at 9' diagonal.

After tweaking all I can say is my CRT and Digital both have their strong points and weak points.

One weird issue I'm having though is I see very faint verticle bars with my HTPC. They're almost invisible, but I can tell, because the image goes from left to right "lighter", "darker", "lighter" in the shape of tall bars about 5-6" wide. Most people probably wouldn't notice this at all, because it's almost invisible, but like the clear Matrix bullet trail I can still see them enough to know that they're there.

Slayer2005

It helps to have an HTPC when doing the focusing trick, because you can use FFDShow to resharpen the picture. If you can't use an HTPC the IMX lens will be good enough.

BTW, I forgot to mention, but the defocus trick works better in one direction than the other direction. I forget which direction gives the best results, but I believe it's counter clockwise when facing the projector. The other way doesn't work good for this trick.

What I do is bring up the menu and try to focus on the top left hand corner letters and then go just a little past (focusing further rather than closer). Again, it helps to have an HTPC with FFDShow for this trick but defocusing in the wrong way is not good even with FFDShow.

Text should be very slightly blurred near the center (this will have very little effect on actual images though) and the image should still look very sharp (sharper with FFDShow though. This is really the magic finisher for this trick.). Defocusing the wrong way tends to give too much defocus and makes it more blurry.

Slayer2005

4805 screenshots in ambient light on my Silver Torus (the really washed out piece on each screenshot is a matte white material) :

Smallville 1:


Sin City 1:


Sin City 2:


Underworld:


Smallville:


Sin City:


Smallville:


All of the screenshots have a 60-watt light on 8 feet infront of the screen and a 500-watt work light bouncing lots of light off of the wall onto the screen from the side (except for the two that have the work light pointed right at the screen). The screenshots were taken with a digital camcorder (not a still camera), so it was unable to capture the quality that I see in person. However, the screenshots should give you an idea of how the screen compares to matte white.

BTW, the room is brighter than it appears.

Spiky

Polarizer is very different from ND. Polarizer blocks light at angles, so if you turn it, the amount and direction of the blockage changes. For photography, polarizer works best when you are aiming perpendicular to the sun, otherwise it has bizarre effects that can be different from one side of the picture to the other. I'm sure this would describe what it does to a PJ's picture.

ND is just a straight light reducer. A good one should have zero effect on color. For PJ use, it also helps increase contrast and black level, which is generally good with cheap digital PJs like we have. Since you like it bright, don't worry about it. If you find yourself getting any headaches, it is probably too bright, you may want to reconsider. I used to have this problem all the time with my tube TV, could not watch that in the dark at all, I needed some ambient light to help my eyes. Now with my PJ I can watch in the dark for hours with no problems.

Spiky

That is an impressive screen. Got any shots without the ambient lighting?

Slayer2005

Not yet, but I'll try to take some if my camcorder will let me. My camcorder isn't so good in low light so I don't know how it'll perform. I can guarantee one thing and that is that the picture will probably be about half as saturated as what I see in person (the ones I posted aren't as saturated as what I see either).

I'll definitely probably skip the ND filter. I already have a CRT for all of the contrast and black levels I could ever need, so I'll use the DLP for Plasma like brightness. .

Slayer2005

It only seems to have bizarre fx when another polarizer is introduced. The only effect I have gotten using one is about a 56% loss of light, regardless of position. No weird fx with the light though. However, when placed infront of the camera by itself it has some neat fx.

X

I saw that powerbuy, I'm considering it.

Your post at AVS mentioned the lamp power mode. Is that what you're talking about?

I had already downloaded the manual, I forget the link but I can email it to you. Mine came with manual, s-video, 2 composite cables, VGA w/USB, etc. Looks like I was lucky.

I exclusively use an HTPC for viewing on my good displays. I don't have time now but I'll respond to your posts concerning its use later.

Slayer2005

I found the power mode setting. It's set to "low" already. Thanks