Hi Guys,
You all know that the LCD panel itself swallow lot of light from the lamp, but could you figure out how much is it? I mean before LCD panel put in place the projected light brightness at the screen = 100%, then after the LCD panel in place reduce to = ...%. It will help to choose the lamp power.
thank you.
You all know that the LCD panel itself swallow lot of light from the lamp, but could you figure out how much is it? I mean before LCD panel put in place the projected light brightness at the screen = 100%, then after the LCD panel in place reduce to = ...%. It will help to choose the lamp power.
thank you.
If i remember correctly, I think only 15% will get through. So 85% of the light is loss.
Can someone confirm this number? I know it's a heck of a lot which is lost.
edit: had 75% up there instead of 85... woops 🙂
Can someone confirm this number? I know it's a heck of a lot which is lost.
edit: had 75% up there instead of 85... woops 🙂
I heard 10. But I think it varies too. I'm sure it prob. goes as high as 15% on TFT but those poly ones or whatever its much higher. There are dif ways that they make the color pixels. Die is one way, ink impregneted gel another, yadda yadda. But anyhow yes it is low. Also only 50% of your light is even accepted by the panel. Even less gets passed on... Two polarizations. P1 and P2. P2 is absorbed by the panels polarizer. P1 is passed on and viewed. Your light source is 50% P1 and 50% P2. This is what light recycling is about. Converting or getting some of the P2 to change to P1 then pass back through the panel this time accepted as P1 and some again rejected as P2. By a small portion each time P1 comes back. Then in other ways its a pure convertion too. Theres alot more to it also but, well Id get tired of typing I think. hehe.
Someone here, dont remember who. Said that if you hold a panel up to the light that what you see is as black as the panel can get (contrast). Thats wrong I think??, after alot of reading about lcd tech lately. The pixels cut off light by the crystals twisting the angle of light thus the last filter after lcd film cuts out light making it black. How quickly the light can be stopped by this method of twisting due to several limitations is the result of the contrast ratio. So the quicker it cuts out the light the blacker it apears. Also the quicker it can iluminate aswell of course. This is how i understand it. Anyone else got somthing on it?😕 I wanna make sure its right.....
Someone here, dont remember who. Said that if you hold a panel up to the light that what you see is as black as the panel can get (contrast). Thats wrong I think??, after alot of reading about lcd tech lately. The pixels cut off light by the crystals twisting the angle of light thus the last filter after lcd film cuts out light making it black. How quickly the light can be stopped by this method of twisting due to several limitations is the result of the contrast ratio. So the quicker it cuts out the light the blacker it apears. Also the quicker it can iluminate aswell of course. This is how i understand it. Anyone else got somthing on it?😕 I wanna make sure its right.....
Dear Tinker
See, that is when i get troubled..... with statements that the light gets sucked up and energy gets lost.
i have seen projectors consuming less than 275 watts (and that means including amp (sound) fan (cooling) panel (display( and then light bulb(s) ...... ( light bulb of 200 watts or less is not uncommon in lcd projectors)*******
if these displays were to stop between 75 and 85 pct then ALL the stories here about a 400 W MH should be a success but they aren't instead non polarized light such as fluorescent and less than half of that succceeds.
see tinker something somewhere is wrong here. I cannot explain
a) i am not such a technical bozo
b) my english is far from perfect ...
but maybe, maybe someone sees the light here and does know why this goes and that doesn't.
******** same with ohp's some bulbs less than 275 watts seem to give enough output to have more than descent results.
i want to remind some of you on this forum that some guy started an interesting line here : car lights (like the one on chevy's from the early 80's you know the sylvania rectangular type that you can buy for less than $15. The bulb is a nonreplaceable type glued inside a holder . more important the bulb is mounted horizontally and the reflector is a perfect match.
I AM GOING TO DO THE TEST and replace the 2 fluorex with one of those lamps, this is easy for me due to relative simple set up and the powersupply already inthe casing. see what result this gives.
See, that is when i get troubled..... with statements that the light gets sucked up and energy gets lost.
i have seen projectors consuming less than 275 watts (and that means including amp (sound) fan (cooling) panel (display( and then light bulb(s) ...... ( light bulb of 200 watts or less is not uncommon in lcd projectors)*******
if these displays were to stop between 75 and 85 pct then ALL the stories here about a 400 W MH should be a success but they aren't instead non polarized light such as fluorescent and less than half of that succceeds.
see tinker something somewhere is wrong here. I cannot explain
a) i am not such a technical bozo
b) my english is far from perfect ...
but maybe, maybe someone sees the light here and does know why this goes and that doesn't.
******** same with ohp's some bulbs less than 275 watts seem to give enough output to have more than descent results.
i want to remind some of you on this forum that some guy started an interesting line here : car lights (like the one on chevy's from the early 80's you know the sylvania rectangular type that you can buy for less than $15. The bulb is a nonreplaceable type glued inside a holder . more important the bulb is mounted horizontally and the reflector is a perfect match.
I AM GOING TO DO THE TEST and replace the 2 fluorex with one of those lamps, this is easy for me due to relative simple set up and the powersupply already inthe casing. see what result this gives.
By the way when one says the lgiht is polarzed they mean that one polarity has been filtered out or converted. Like only P1 light passed and P2 absorbed (LCD panel does this very thing)or reflected (birefringent film or prism) or P1 and P2 converted to P1 then reflected back with a prism film or 1/4 wave plate.
So polarized light means one polarity ither removed in one way or another. LCD panels only use P1 look at any lcd tech site (like that "how things work" site which is really good by the way). P2 is absorbed and whe the polarizer film wears eventually out you get blurred pics.🙁
So polarized light means one polarity ither removed in one way or another. LCD panels only use P1 look at any lcd tech site (like that "how things work" site which is really good by the way). P2 is absorbed and whe the polarizer film wears eventually out you get blurred pics.🙁
Actually here I'll prove it to ya once to help you understand it. Use your lens to focus your light source into a little spot as small as posible (f1) then place your hand or white paper in the lgiht path. See how bright and intense it is. Now take your lcd panel and place it between the lens and light like usual. Find f1 with this setup and it focused. It will still be the same distance as before BUT the light beam will now be ALOT dimmer. This is how much your panel is loseing. Oh yeah and make sure the panel is on when doing this. I've done this and there is a HUGE dif. The panel eats up alot fo light thats is for sure. Alot more is lost do to polarity aswell.
As Tinker has said light polarization is important.
Ordinary light sources such as Haloden or Metal halide are randomly polarized. Half the light power is in the P polarization. Half the light is in the S polarization.
LCD panels use P polarized light. Or S polarised light. One or the other but not both.
That means that the panel can only use the P polarized light and the S polarized light is absorbed as heat by the first polarizer.
Therefore LCD panels use only 50 percent light of the original light.
If the panel looses 90 percent of the source light it gets, it would be twice as bright if we could arrange all the light from the source to be P polarized. That is possible. 3 panel projectors do this.
Just how possible and practical and economical it is for DIY people is a question to be anwered. Maybe someone does these experiments.
But it is an important question because
Instead of using a 450 watt Metal halide we could use 250 Watt. Smaller bulb, smaller ballast, easier reflector, less heat, less fan noise and use less electricity. Maybe also cheaper bulb/ballast.
This is an idealised situation. It may not be economical to try and get all the light going through the LCD but even 80 percent would be a good advantage.
With only light of the correct polarization hitting the LCD, the first polarizer has far less work to do so does not heat up and does not dim your picture as time goes by.
Ordinary light sources such as Haloden or Metal halide are randomly polarized. Half the light power is in the P polarization. Half the light is in the S polarization.
LCD panels use P polarized light. Or S polarised light. One or the other but not both.
That means that the panel can only use the P polarized light and the S polarized light is absorbed as heat by the first polarizer.
Therefore LCD panels use only 50 percent light of the original light.
If the panel looses 90 percent of the source light it gets, it would be twice as bright if we could arrange all the light from the source to be P polarized. That is possible. 3 panel projectors do this.
Just how possible and practical and economical it is for DIY people is a question to be anwered. Maybe someone does these experiments.
But it is an important question because
Instead of using a 450 watt Metal halide we could use 250 Watt. Smaller bulb, smaller ballast, easier reflector, less heat, less fan noise and use less electricity. Maybe also cheaper bulb/ballast.
This is an idealised situation. It may not be economical to try and get all the light going through the LCD but even 80 percent would be a good advantage.
With only light of the correct polarization hitting the LCD, the first polarizer has far less work to do so does not heat up and does not dim your picture as time goes by.
ok i am wrong!
i can admit that i am wrong. I was told that only great minds change their judgements about things.
but where am i wrong? why does the lfuorex succeed with me while being completely out of the range of theories that are proclaimed here..... i really would like to know. Why is it that with brute power and the 2 fluorexes some one and a half inch away from one fresnel and another inch from the lcd panel followed by one inch of spacing and than a delta IV lens the picture projected is more than descent! i would really want to say pretty darn good!
i read here of washing colors away, daze, haze, screen door effect, those things do not seem to exist in this set up ? why is that?
the 16/9 i get by pulling my box back , when playing this format so that the projected picure covers the screen completely ( i made it in 16/9 format from the beginning) again, something so easy........ i have no special lcd 16/9 but i know that when playing a widescreen dvd on my extremely cheap Mintek dvd player trhough the lcd, i get a widescreen result that does give me the whole screen.
see this are some of the things that bother me ..
further more Nobody has answered my question on 16/9 being a format completely against nature and mankind... ===sighhhhhhhh===
i really wish someone would help me understand why when i do something completely wrong, the results are positive! ! ! ! !
i can admit that i am wrong. I was told that only great minds change their judgements about things.
but where am i wrong? why does the lfuorex succeed with me while being completely out of the range of theories that are proclaimed here..... i really would like to know. Why is it that with brute power and the 2 fluorexes some one and a half inch away from one fresnel and another inch from the lcd panel followed by one inch of spacing and than a delta IV lens the picture projected is more than descent! i would really want to say pretty darn good!
i read here of washing colors away, daze, haze, screen door effect, those things do not seem to exist in this set up ? why is that?
the 16/9 i get by pulling my box back , when playing this format so that the projected picure covers the screen completely ( i made it in 16/9 format from the beginning) again, something so easy........ i have no special lcd 16/9 but i know that when playing a widescreen dvd on my extremely cheap Mintek dvd player trhough the lcd, i get a widescreen result that does give me the whole screen.
see this are some of the things that bother me ..
further more Nobody has answered my question on 16/9 being a format completely against nature and mankind... ===sighhhhhhhh===
i really wish someone would help me understand why when i do something completely wrong, the results are positive! ! ! ! !
Re: ok i am wrong!
Hello 🙂
Personally, without research at the moment, I think that the reason they chose 16x9 is because it's a round number. Theres no decimals it's jut a flat number.
As for your setup, did you ever post pictures of it? I can't remember. If it's a cheap setup and it works, I'd love to see the results.
uvodee said:
Hello 🙂
Personally, without research at the moment, I think that the reason they chose 16x9 is because it's a round number. Theres no decimals it's jut a flat number.
As for your setup, did you ever post pictures of it? I can't remember. If it's a cheap setup and it works, I'd love to see the results.
Re: ok i am wrong!
No one said you can tuse those bulbs. THe point is they arent very good. I have one here. It says its 8000 lumens. But it was half as bright as my old halogen 90watt bulb which is only 1,200 lumens. See the thing there. The higher lumens doesnt mean brighter picture. Its cause of how the bulb is. Now I got a picture with it, just that I had seen it with other bulb first . Two of those would have been as bright as my one halogen. Def. not a good solution so I moved on. Went to MH and ther is no going back now. I love the brightness and how you can control the light. This is because its more of a poit light source. Like the halo vs. flourex. Its all personal preference. I believe you get image with it. But I'm sure it woudlnt be as bright as a MH seeing how I have on eof both and tried both. Seeing is believeing. Have you seen a MH do its magic to compare to your setup. It will change your mind Im sure of it....
uvodee said:
No one said you can tuse those bulbs. THe point is they arent very good. I have one here. It says its 8000 lumens. But it was half as bright as my old halogen 90watt bulb which is only 1,200 lumens. See the thing there. The higher lumens doesnt mean brighter picture. Its cause of how the bulb is. Now I got a picture with it, just that I had seen it with other bulb first . Two of those would have been as bright as my one halogen. Def. not a good solution so I moved on. Went to MH and ther is no going back now. I love the brightness and how you can control the light. This is because its more of a poit light source. Like the halo vs. flourex. Its all personal preference. I believe you get image with it. But I'm sure it woudlnt be as bright as a MH seeing how I have on eof both and tried both. Seeing is believeing. Have you seen a MH do its magic to compare to your setup. It will change your mind Im sure of it....
By the way heres more proof of MH. With my halogen when I turned on the lights the image disapeared. BUT with the MH it not only doesnt vanish it is extreemly watchable with even the edges of screen bright. Dang near my little tv brightness when reflected off silver screen.😀 I'm running a 13" tv below the screen to adjust color and compare brightness, its helped alot so far!
while you guys are talking and talking, others are making money (BIG MONEY) out of this!!!
CHECK THIS OUT!!!
http://www.selectdimension.com/pages/356987/index.htm?gen_time=1032287989378
CHECK THIS OUT!!!
http://www.selectdimension.com/pages/356987/index.htm?gen_time=1032287989378
Yes but there is no real pics of it working though either. I cheked his site. Its the same guy from ebay. Plus did you see his LCD projector scam....its the same as what we are building but all tidy up in a metal case.for the low low price of $800.00 Ya O.K> let me get my wallet. Tya, I can get a 1 year old sony lcd for that. I saw a DLP for $1500.00🙄
The Whinner
I liked his TV projector only $179 and giving
"As good a picture as a $3000 projector"
You believe that. ??
Its a scam. He is just looking for people to suck them in with a glossy website.
Good to remind people about things like this.
I liked his TV projector only $179 and giving
"As good a picture as a $3000 projector"
You believe that. ??
Its a scam. He is just looking for people to suck them in with a glossy website.
Good to remind people about things like this.
remp, read my posts at "very simple projection plans"!
i wrote how to put fresnels, its the same thing as they did, but here nobody wont to try it!
nobody here experiments, everybody is just talking and talking and talking!
i wrote how to put fresnels, its the same thing as they did, but here nobody wont to try it!
nobody here experiments, everybody is just talking and talking and talking!
I did try it, the edges were blurry but I thought it was due to the first fres. not covering the hole screen of course. None the less Im not spending $30 on a fres. big enuff to try it when I have a perfectly good working 100x brighter lcd projetor. I do things, not just talk-so I resent that staitment personally. If you even knew how much experimenting I have done with this stuff in the past month alone you wouldnt have even said that. Some of us are "do'ers" but we wait untill we have solid #'s and figures to go by. Significant gains instead of just mindlessdribble. It takes time and patience. Please be more leanient towards those who only "theorise" and not do these tests. Having a theory to prove or disprove is 50% of what a experiment is about. ONLY After that it becomes fact or fiction. Lets not forget that. Ideas are hard to come by and the more minds thinking the greater the input.😉
Quote by the whinner
nobody here experiments, everybody is just talking and talking and talking!
That is a terrible thing to say. You are being very disrespetful to a lot of people.
Open your eye then you see hundreds of guys experimenting, suggesting improvememts, suggesting places to find items, supply drawings of setups, posting pictures of progress and finished projectors, helping other guys get pinouts for connecting cables, posting links to helpful info, trying out how to make reflectors, trying out different lighting systems, and many other advances.
For your information many succesful large screen projectors have been made and are in the process of being made.
Guys here co-operate with each other. Someone has a problem and someone else or several others will post a helpful reply. Have you not noticed that.
As far as your comments that no one is interested in trying your suggestion maybe they are not interested. I tried the idea of putting lens in front of a Tv years ago but found it worked but not very good so moved on to a proper projector.
Your comments are unsuitable to say that we dont do any experimenting but just talk, talk, talk, I have asked the moderators to put you in the sin bin for two weeks starting now.
nobody here experiments, everybody is just talking and talking and talking!
That is a terrible thing to say. You are being very disrespetful to a lot of people.
Open your eye then you see hundreds of guys experimenting, suggesting improvememts, suggesting places to find items, supply drawings of setups, posting pictures of progress and finished projectors, helping other guys get pinouts for connecting cables, posting links to helpful info, trying out how to make reflectors, trying out different lighting systems, and many other advances.
For your information many succesful large screen projectors have been made and are in the process of being made.
Guys here co-operate with each other. Someone has a problem and someone else or several others will post a helpful reply. Have you not noticed that.
As far as your comments that no one is interested in trying your suggestion maybe they are not interested. I tried the idea of putting lens in front of a Tv years ago but found it worked but not very good so moved on to a proper projector.
Your comments are unsuitable to say that we dont do any experimenting but just talk, talk, talk, I have asked the moderators to put you in the sin bin for two weeks starting now.