property
it is a normal reflector for example of a theatre "light gun" the spots you use theatre to light the stage... I had the same type of reflector in my lamp but couldn't use it because the heat is too hot...
it is a normal reflector for example of a theatre "light gun" the spots you use theatre to light the stage... I had the same type of reflector in my lamp but couldn't use it because the heat is too hot...
screenshots
Property:
If anyone wants their screenshots to look decent they will use a tripod and a DARK ROOM. None of this "blinds 1/2 open" stuff. Even a $5,000 projector is gonna look like s**t in a lit room. If you expect to watch it in those conditions get a rear proj. big screen HDTV monitor. Besides.....movies are meant to be watched at night! (I never felt right going to a matinee!)
Property:
If anyone wants their screenshots to look decent they will use a tripod and a DARK ROOM. None of this "blinds 1/2 open" stuff. Even a $5,000 projector is gonna look like s**t in a lit room. If you expect to watch it in those conditions get a rear proj. big screen HDTV monitor. Besides.....movies are meant to be watched at night! (I never felt right going to a matinee!)
reflector info
I f a parobolic reflector is used I don't have to have a rear fresnel lens, right. If that is the case i found this file to make one. I got my old trig book at home and will lookup how to find the 'center' of a parobola. I remember that this is the point we need to use to make all the rays of light that hit the reflector reflect in parallel rays. It looks easy enough to build and means that people that are going to go with a split fresnel would only have to use the one in front of the lcd.
please give me some feed back on this idea.
I f a parobolic reflector is used I don't have to have a rear fresnel lens, right. If that is the case i found this file to make one. I got my old trig book at home and will lookup how to find the 'center' of a parobola. I remember that this is the point we need to use to make all the rays of light that hit the reflector reflect in parallel rays. It looks easy enough to build and means that people that are going to go with a split fresnel would only have to use the one in front of the lcd.
please give me some feed back on this idea.
I remeber people on this forum saying laptop screens are hard to use because you have to find a controller board and not all screens have the same controller board, but there are ways for you to use the laptop as a projector.
First you need to find a laptop thats 133Mhz and up, make sure it has pcmcia card slot and/or usb, operating system and floppy/cdrom drive. Now you have lots choses to get video on your computer. The cheapest is a device from Dazzle that uses a usb cables to get video on the screen, only 35$ dollars. You can also buy a extneral tv tuner, but they require high processing power.
Now heres my setup , I'm using a Compaq Lte 5000 75Mhz they come with a special video adapter that hooks up to the docking port in the back of the computer, you can watch full screen video on the compter. My light is a light of America flourescent light equivalent to a 150 watt light bulb got it for ten bucks when K-mart closed down produces little heat and has a long life. Now my lense is a regular magnifying 4 inches 6X magnification it sit about one foot away from the screen the picture is great really bright.
Most of you are making yours front projection, but mine is a rear projection. One reason is that you don't have worry about external light you'll have bright picture the other reason way I biuld it as a rear projector because I plan to put it in my living room and I like looking a screen on my wall. I'll post pictures wednesday.
First you need to find a laptop thats 133Mhz and up, make sure it has pcmcia card slot and/or usb, operating system and floppy/cdrom drive. Now you have lots choses to get video on your computer. The cheapest is a device from Dazzle that uses a usb cables to get video on the screen, only 35$ dollars. You can also buy a extneral tv tuner, but they require high processing power.
Now heres my setup , I'm using a Compaq Lte 5000 75Mhz they come with a special video adapter that hooks up to the docking port in the back of the computer, you can watch full screen video on the compter. My light is a light of America flourescent light equivalent to a 150 watt light bulb got it for ten bucks when K-mart closed down produces little heat and has a long life. Now my lense is a regular magnifying 4 inches 6X magnification it sit about one foot away from the screen the picture is great really bright.
Most of you are making yours front projection, but mine is a rear projection. One reason is that you don't have worry about external light you'll have bright picture the other reason way I biuld it as a rear projector because I plan to put it in my living room and I like looking a screen on my wall. I'll post pictures wednesday.
Please post your pictures and illustrate your setup. I have given rear projection some thought but haven't even realized it on paper yet. the more pictures the better 😀
I have an excellant 9 inch lens that is prime for rear projection..alas I have no room for this type of setup at this time 🙁
zardoz
zardoz
property
property, u are coming out with all of these ideas, put them to practise, and if u are worried about screen brightness on net, forget it, the screen shots on here are just a guide not a reality, like any pic from any cam, digi or normal nothing is the same as for real, so i sujest make a projector and see what u get, if u dont like it, modify it, guys in here arent silly and they dont take crap or time wasters and they have been at this for a while, so i sugest make your bloody own projector like the rest of us in here and stop posting crap and formulas that u made up that nobody even understands, im making my projector and ill have pics of the actual unit that has taken me nearly 2.5months to build from scratch in the near future, make yours, show yours and share your ideas that didnt put u in intensive care for a month and the ones that work.
happy diy
Trev
property, u are coming out with all of these ideas, put them to practise, and if u are worried about screen brightness on net, forget it, the screen shots on here are just a guide not a reality, like any pic from any cam, digi or normal nothing is the same as for real, so i sujest make a projector and see what u get, if u dont like it, modify it, guys in here arent silly and they dont take crap or time wasters and they have been at this for a while, so i sugest make your bloody own projector like the rest of us in here and stop posting crap and formulas that u made up that nobody even understands, im making my projector and ill have pics of the actual unit that has taken me nearly 2.5months to build from scratch in the near future, make yours, show yours and share your ideas that didnt put u in intensive care for a month and the ones that work.
happy diy
Trev
property
property i have read most of the posts in here before i made a post, i read the post for 3months before i made my first post, i made sure i atleast knew what this was all about and what others have tried and failed, that way i wouldnt be bugging these guys with the same quetions they get over and over all of the time setting them back when they are trying to move forward into this technology, after the 3 months i went out and bought a lcd, pulled it apart and went from there, i had the lcd for 2 weeks before i made a post and the only trouble i had was with uv and ir filters, that wasnt coverd so much in the forum until now, and for the past 2.5months im actually building the thing, i didnt go with an ohp but i went my own way with the gratful help of the guys in the forum to projuce my ideas and my own projector, this is my first projector i am making and it wont be my last, the second will be the ohp way not only for various reasons but maybe i can put some of the help that these guys gave me back to them.
Trev
property i have read most of the posts in here before i made a post, i read the post for 3months before i made my first post, i made sure i atleast knew what this was all about and what others have tried and failed, that way i wouldnt be bugging these guys with the same quetions they get over and over all of the time setting them back when they are trying to move forward into this technology, after the 3 months i went out and bought a lcd, pulled it apart and went from there, i had the lcd for 2 weeks before i made a post and the only trouble i had was with uv and ir filters, that wasnt coverd so much in the forum until now, and for the past 2.5months im actually building the thing, i didnt go with an ohp but i went my own way with the gratful help of the guys in the forum to projuce my ideas and my own projector, this is my first projector i am making and it wont be my last, the second will be the ohp way not only for various reasons but maybe i can put some of the help that these guys gave me back to them.
Trev
scale and lighting conditions
Ace3000. Without a scale and description of lighting conditions, I can't tell what the results truly are for people's setups, so i can't make a judgement as to which are more successful than others.
Person A's posted pics may seem brighter/clearer/etc, than Person B's when I view the posted pics.
BUT in reality the COMPLETE opposite might be true. Person B's results might be brighter/clearer/etc...
A description of lighting conditions along with a scale by the poster describing ( in percentage or between 1 and 10, or whatever scale) how much darker/lighter the posted pic is compared to the actual result, would help this.
If you don't like the scale idea then i suggest you come up with another method.
Either way, a way to determine a more accurate comparison of posted results is ESSENTIAL, and we should come up NOW with an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to do it.
Ace3000. Without a scale and description of lighting conditions, I can't tell what the results truly are for people's setups, so i can't make a judgement as to which are more successful than others.
Person A's posted pics may seem brighter/clearer/etc, than Person B's when I view the posted pics.
BUT in reality the COMPLETE opposite might be true. Person B's results might be brighter/clearer/etc...
A description of lighting conditions along with a scale by the poster describing ( in percentage or between 1 and 10, or whatever scale) how much darker/lighter the posted pic is compared to the actual result, would help this.
If you don't like the scale idea then i suggest you come up with another method.
Either way, a way to determine a more accurate comparison of posted results is ESSENTIAL, and we should come up NOW with an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to do it.
property
property an alternative to the scale u so want to make up is use your eyes lol look at the things in the background and determine roughly how bright it is, unfortunatley for this reason we all do not have the same camera's, and all cams have different light colour and sensitiviness, as i said its only a guide, go to their place and have a look , just ask they may let u if u live in their area, as i said before the majority on here that post pics are above aceptible, and the best way for u to find out is to build one of your own, its not that expencive and u will learn somthing on the way, just get an ohp retrofit it with a small burning mh bulb that puts out 20000lm's and your set for a perfect 100' image, just that! most ohp's u dont need to do anything than to just change the light to an mh setup, all of the lenses are fine, the onl;y prob could be finding a 14" lcd screen now that will fit the top of the ohp better than a 15" read a few posts dating back 2 years or so, better yet read it from the start, and u will find all of the info u could even wish for.
Trev
property an alternative to the scale u so want to make up is use your eyes lol look at the things in the background and determine roughly how bright it is, unfortunatley for this reason we all do not have the same camera's, and all cams have different light colour and sensitiviness, as i said its only a guide, go to their place and have a look , just ask they may let u if u live in their area, as i said before the majority on here that post pics are above aceptible, and the best way for u to find out is to build one of your own, its not that expencive and u will learn somthing on the way, just get an ohp retrofit it with a small burning mh bulb that puts out 20000lm's and your set for a perfect 100' image, just that! most ohp's u dont need to do anything than to just change the light to an mh setup, all of the lenses are fine, the onl;y prob could be finding a 14" lcd screen now that will fit the top of the ohp better than a 15" read a few posts dating back 2 years or so, better yet read it from the start, and u will find all of the info u could even wish for.
Trev
For The Future
And an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to understand posted results is still essential. And we should come up with one. It's do-able, and should have been done a long time ago.
And an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to understand posted results is still essential. And we should come up with one. It's do-able, and should have been done a long time ago.
Re: property
That it what we have all been doing and it is not good enough. Like i said in the first post i made on this topic, depending on what brightness setting i give my screen, posted pics look like 6am in the morning with blinds open, to 4pm mid-afternoon with blinds closed, to 12 midnight with blinds half open.
That's why we need a standard method of description with every posted result pic. I don't see what the argument against this is for.
ace3000_1 said:
That it what we have all been doing and it is not good enough. Like i said in the first post i made on this topic, depending on what brightness setting i give my screen, posted pics look like 6am in the morning with blinds open, to 4pm mid-afternoon with blinds closed, to 12 midnight with blinds half open.
That's why we need a standard method of description with every posted result pic. I don't see what the argument against this is for.
property
and what about the brightness of your monitor? your monitor might be brighter than mine and might have a different contrast setting too, wana callobrate them as well? why dont u just ask the person who puts a pic up how it looks in the pic compered to real life? we dont have a prob in here but u do, so it looks like you are the one who will be asking, undream even said in his posting that his pic is darker in real life than the cam so i dont see a prob there at all,proto5 has told us he has too much colour or he hasnt calibrated it yet, i just mentioned it to him that it looks abit to colourful and he came back and told us that he hasnt calibrated it yet, i think thats good enough and fair enough, im not knocking your ideas property but realy i dont think that people give a **** about some brightness formula
Trev
and what about the brightness of your monitor? your monitor might be brighter than mine and might have a different contrast setting too, wana callobrate them as well? why dont u just ask the person who puts a pic up how it looks in the pic compered to real life? we dont have a prob in here but u do, so it looks like you are the one who will be asking, undream even said in his posting that his pic is darker in real life than the cam so i dont see a prob there at all,proto5 has told us he has too much colour or he hasnt calibrated it yet, i just mentioned it to him that it looks abit to colourful and he came back and told us that he hasnt calibrated it yet, i think thats good enough and fair enough, im not knocking your ideas property but realy i dont think that people give a **** about some brightness formula
Trev
property
anyway bud im going to leave it at that, i thinks unfair for the new comers who read these postings and for the people who are in here, there is enough crap in here and im not going to add anymore so good luck diy and tell us your resaults if u ever build a projector
Trev
anyway bud im going to leave it at that, i thinks unfair for the new comers who read these postings and for the people who are in here, there is enough crap in here and im not going to add anymore so good luck diy and tell us your resaults if u ever build a projector
Trev
getting old
Property:
Give it up. It's not gonna happen.
Just start building a projector using the info already here. All this formula and weird water cooling crap does nothing but alienate us "more experienced" DIY's in here. And quit posting so much, cause we really don't give a crap about 99% of your posts so far....and you don't want to get booted.....
Property:
Give it up. It's not gonna happen.
Just start building a projector using the info already here. All this formula and weird water cooling crap does nothing but alienate us "more experienced" DIY's in here. And quit posting so much, cause we really don't give a crap about 99% of your posts so far....and you don't want to get booted.....
Property
"Either way, a way to determine a more accurate comparison of posted results is ESSENTIAL, and we should come up NOW with an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to do it."
"And an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to understand posted results is still essential. And we should come up with one. It's do-able, and should have been done a long time ago."
Given ALL of the VARIABLES what you ask for is not in any way practical nor will the results have any merrit whatsoever. There are NO benchmarks that will be the same from one machine to another...nor from one "eye" to another.
I understand what it is you are trying to do..but without establishing a "baseline" that can be applied from one setup to another your results will be "skewed". Even if a baseline could be established there are still too many variables...screen gain...lamp source...signal source....on and on... You would need to say ok with a model#XXX movie screen @ X number of feet from the PJ...with bulb X...and panel X....and signal X...resollution X....even after all of this is established you are relying on the "eye of the beholder" to be the final factor. It should be noted that the builder of a DIY projector will see shortcomings you as the audience might not. Likewise a builder might say "gosh I'm happy with this thing...and it's oh so bright.." but to you and I, having invested nothing in that particular setup it might look like crap.
zardoz ....wastes no more time on this topic
"Either way, a way to determine a more accurate comparison of posted results is ESSENTIAL, and we should come up NOW with an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to do it."
"And an agreed upon, standard, and simple way to understand posted results is still essential. And we should come up with one. It's do-able, and should have been done a long time ago."
Given ALL of the VARIABLES what you ask for is not in any way practical nor will the results have any merrit whatsoever. There are NO benchmarks that will be the same from one machine to another...nor from one "eye" to another.
I understand what it is you are trying to do..but without establishing a "baseline" that can be applied from one setup to another your results will be "skewed". Even if a baseline could be established there are still too many variables...screen gain...lamp source...signal source....on and on... You would need to say ok with a model#XXX movie screen @ X number of feet from the PJ...with bulb X...and panel X....and signal X...resollution X....even after all of this is established you are relying on the "eye of the beholder" to be the final factor. It should be noted that the builder of a DIY projector will see shortcomings you as the audience might not. Likewise a builder might say "gosh I'm happy with this thing...and it's oh so bright.." but to you and I, having invested nothing in that particular setup it might look like crap.
zardoz ....wastes no more time on this topic