yeah, i understand, but that's still low.
plus, a 200W metal halide is more like 5-6K lumen right?
plus, a 200W metal halide is more like 5-6K lumen right?
generally, Metal halide bulbs range from 80-100 lumens PER watt. so, it would put a 200w bulb at 16,000-20,000 lumens. If its a different type, or an older design, it might not be so efficient.
I found another place that mey help with info and getting like to/through LCD panels. might be able to offer more as well.
http://www.man-machine.com/lcdcustm.htm
http://www.man-machine.com/lcdcustm.htm
cowanrg said:
RCA composite video is a one-channel signal that combines information about chrominance, luminance, picture, and sync. This is the most common connector found on consumer-level video equipment.
S-video (also known as Y/C) produces a higher-quality picture than RCA composite because it splits up the chrominance and luminance information into two separate signals.
Technically S-Video is a form of component video.
In practice, most DVD players provide about 500 lines instead of 540 because of filtering and low-quality digital-to-analog converters. VHS has about 230 (172 widescreen) lines, broadcast TV has about 330 (248 widescreen), and laserdisc has about 425 (318 widescreen). Scan lines, on the other hand, measure resolution along the y axis. DVD produces 480 scan lines of active picture for NTSC and 576 for PAL. The NTSC standard has 525 total scan lines, but only 480 to 483 or so are visible. (The extra lines are black and are encoded with other information). Since all video formats (VHS, LD, broadcast, etc.) have the same number of scan lines, it's the horizontal resolution that makes the big difference in picture quality.
so ,if you are watching non digital cable, or vhs a line doubler can help. If you are watching digital cable, Ld, DVD Svideo will be the better way to go.
i called the guy where they do the lcd repairs and the light inhancements. he said its a film that captures lost light. it gose between the lcd and the back light . he said he dosent no if it will work with a projector lite cause they never worked with the film like in that way or something like that.etc.
where the film is positioned, i really dont see how that would work?
im not sure if they have polarizer that let more light through.
do they? i should have asked.
😀 😀 😀 😀
where the film is positioned, i really dont see how that would work?
im not sure if they have polarizer that let more light through.
do they? i should have asked.
😀 😀 😀 😀
ChuckReese said:
Well like I said im an electriction so I got lots of cool tools to work with I used a hydrolic hole cutter it can cut a perfect hole in some thick metal.
lumileds is the manufacture for the led that vdi_nenna is talking about. they got the specs but i dont understand that stuff. if someone no's that stuff cheak out the website
maybe "flux" might be a important word in that site. im clueless?
note i have a little feeling it can do more than 44 lumens.
😀 😀 😀 😀
maybe "flux" might be a important word in that site. im clueless?
note i have a little feeling it can do more than 44 lumens.
😀 😀 😀 😀
anybody used this
http://www.xbox-online.net/flash/multivgabox.htm
Im looking at a way to input to my LCD, and this looked like it might be an option. Have seent he cheesebox, and know that is out there, but was wondering if anybody used one of these. I see um on E-bay for $10-15 every once and awhile, thought it might be worth a try.
Clok
http://www.xbox-online.net/flash/multivgabox.htm
Im looking at a way to input to my LCD, and this looked like it might be an option. Have seent he cheesebox, and know that is out there, but was wondering if anybody used one of these. I see um on E-bay for $10-15 every once and awhile, thought it might be worth a try.
Clok
ansi definition
undream,
ANSI= (american national standards institute). group that generates product performance standards for many u.s. industries.
note: the grainger box i found this and other in was made in 1995
so it could of changed😀 😀 😀 😀
undream,
ANSI= (american national standards institute). group that generates product performance standards for many u.s. industries.
note: the grainger box i found this and other in was made in 1995
so it could of changed😀 😀 😀 😀
I know what ANSI stands for. I was just pointing it out to them that the 200 lumen rating had nothing to do with the brightness of the bulb.
ANSI lumens are taken by cutting the *projected* image into 9 equal pieces.
The lux measurement is taken on each one of these 9 sections, and averaged
ANSI Lumen = (L1+L2+L3+L4+L5+L6+L7+L8+L9)/9 * Screen Surface (square meters)
and there you go, ANSI lumens. Way to difficult for us to measure on our homemade projectors.
ANSI lumens are taken by cutting the *projected* image into 9 equal pieces.
The lux measurement is taken on each one of these 9 sections, and averaged
ANSI Lumen = (L1+L2+L3+L4+L5+L6+L7+L8+L9)/9 * Screen Surface (square meters)
and there you go, ANSI lumens. Way to difficult for us to measure on our homemade projectors.
powerful LEDs
I think we are getting confused about these LEDs Vince brought up. I think the important thing about them is the collimation. These things seem to be highly collimated, meaning that instead of your energy going out a sphere as the photons leave the bulb, the energy goes straight ahead. This is exactly what the web page Vince posted pointed out, hed couldn't even take a picture of the LED dead on, it saturated his A to D converter on his digital camera.
Point is that these could be very interesting, because they would eliminate the need to collimate our light with elliptical mirrors, and everything else people were coming up with. An array of these things approximately the same size as you LCD, set up exactly behind your LCD would send light through the LCD with little waste. That is why this might work, and probably why Vince posted it. I am trying to figure out how to correct the number of lumens the webpage gives for the fact that the light is highly collimated, but I am not sure I can.
Anyway that is my .02
I think we are getting confused about these LEDs Vince brought up. I think the important thing about them is the collimation. These things seem to be highly collimated, meaning that instead of your energy going out a sphere as the photons leave the bulb, the energy goes straight ahead. This is exactly what the web page Vince posted pointed out, hed couldn't even take a picture of the LED dead on, it saturated his A to D converter on his digital camera.
Point is that these could be very interesting, because they would eliminate the need to collimate our light with elliptical mirrors, and everything else people were coming up with. An array of these things approximately the same size as you LCD, set up exactly behind your LCD would send light through the LCD with little waste. That is why this might work, and probably why Vince posted it. I am trying to figure out how to correct the number of lumens the webpage gives for the fact that the light is highly collimated, but I am not sure I can.
Anyway that is my .02
sence the led is in a fixture(small one) its measured by foot candle
(lumen per square foot) is that right undream
(lumen per square foot) is that right undream
Check my logic here,
The datasheet for those LED's says that 90% of the light comes out in a 25 degree angle when using the optics.
If you don't use the optics the light comes out such that 90% of it is within 110 degrees, and probably 100% of it is within 180%, but we will go with the 90%.
So if the light puts out 16.2 lumens (18 lm * 0.9) into 110 degrees, then it will put out
16.2 lm * 110 degrees/25 degrees = 71 lumens into
a 25 degree angle.
So it still seems that they don't produce enough light, but we have to figure out how many lumens of our 41,000 lumen MH bulds actually do something (I mean get to the LCD and get focused). I don't have any inuition about this.
J
The datasheet for those LED's says that 90% of the light comes out in a 25 degree angle when using the optics.
If you don't use the optics the light comes out such that 90% of it is within 110 degrees, and probably 100% of it is within 180%, but we will go with the 90%.
So if the light puts out 16.2 lumens (18 lm * 0.9) into 110 degrees, then it will put out
16.2 lm * 110 degrees/25 degrees = 71 lumens into
a 25 degree angle.
So it still seems that they don't produce enough light, but we have to figure out how many lumens of our 41,000 lumen MH bulds actually do something (I mean get to the LCD and get focused). I don't have any inuition about this.
J
well, for discussion sake, think about this...
if only 2% of light gets through from a 44K lumen MH bulb, thats 880 lumen right? however, if 100% of the ligh gets through on one of these bulbs, let's say its about 80 lumen each. well, take 10 of those, you have $150... for 800 lumen.
so, i dunno, seems kinda sketchy still. although its cooler (by FAR) then the MH bulb, i seriously doubt only 2% of the light gets through. if we say 10%, we are at 4K lumens, which would take 55 LED's, no biggie, but that would cost $825 🙂 count me out.
if only 2% of light gets through from a 44K lumen MH bulb, thats 880 lumen right? however, if 100% of the ligh gets through on one of these bulbs, let's say its about 80 lumen each. well, take 10 of those, you have $150... for 800 lumen.
so, i dunno, seems kinda sketchy still. although its cooler (by FAR) then the MH bulb, i seriously doubt only 2% of the light gets through. if we say 10%, we are at 4K lumens, which would take 55 LED's, no biggie, but that would cost $825 🙂 count me out.
I spent $36 at lowes tonight. I think that it is my last major purchase.
two 4'x8' 1/4" thick Hardboard: going to use this stuff as the casing. Easy to work with, rigid enough to be strong, light enough to make it easy to move. If fire hazard seems to be a problem (which I highly, highly doubt), I'll line the inside with another material, yet to be determined.
two chrome handles: so I can pick the darn thing up easily.
10"x12" piece of glass to replace the one I broke.
some lumber to make my reflector. I'm going to have to take some pics of what I'm going to do. it will be pretty raggedy, but possibly work.
Also, I'm a moron. Thanks to everyone who helped me with my QA-1750 and the video input selector. You have to press MENU, SELECT UP, and SELECT DOWN simultaneously, or use the remote (which I had tucked away in a box and didnt think about). It works fine, and I feel stupid for freaking out about it.
So, this weekend, I'm gonna get down and dirty building the box! yay, thanks to everyone for their ideas and input, and..
Hello Vince, thanks for starting this thread! it took me only 3 months from starting to read this board to where I am now, and I owe it all to everyone here! Thanks again
two 4'x8' 1/4" thick Hardboard: going to use this stuff as the casing. Easy to work with, rigid enough to be strong, light enough to make it easy to move. If fire hazard seems to be a problem (which I highly, highly doubt), I'll line the inside with another material, yet to be determined.
two chrome handles: so I can pick the darn thing up easily.
10"x12" piece of glass to replace the one I broke.
some lumber to make my reflector. I'm going to have to take some pics of what I'm going to do. it will be pretty raggedy, but possibly work.
Also, I'm a moron. Thanks to everyone who helped me with my QA-1750 and the video input selector. You have to press MENU, SELECT UP, and SELECT DOWN simultaneously, or use the remote (which I had tucked away in a box and didnt think about). It works fine, and I feel stupid for freaking out about it.
So, this weekend, I'm gonna get down and dirty building the box! yay, thanks to everyone for their ideas and input, and..
Hello Vince, thanks for starting this thread! it took me only 3 months from starting to read this board to where I am now, and I owe it all to everyone here! Thanks again
Well Im going on vacation this weekend I will be building a custom box starting next weekend I cant wait to watch some movies and my friends keep asking me when its gonna be done to heh.
done with the behemoth of a thread
wow, that took a really long time. I didn't have all that much time to read everything at once and it seemed like the tail of this thread kept pulling away as I kept reading further.
I plan on starting my LCD projector sometime in the relativly near future. It seems that the lighting source has settled on the 400W MH. As far as the optics go its a toss up/free for all, but the basic concept of it is pretty solid with a few working ideas. The only thing that hasn't been settled to any resembleance of conformity that I can see is the LCD. I'm just going to look around untill I find a 800x600 6" LCD. that seems like it would be perfect. I'm sure its been looked for before but I'm pretty resiliant and confident that I will find it. I don't have anything to contribute at the moment, but I will be attempting to put up a comprehensive page with most of the basics recapping everything in this thread.
PS:
its not really my place to complain or anything, but im surprised noone has mentioned anything earlier. prjctr_builder, you act like a spoiled b*tch. you expect everyone to do everything for you and then b*tch at everyone when things don't go your way even though all they've been trying to do is help you. grow some gratitude man.
wow, that took a really long time. I didn't have all that much time to read everything at once and it seemed like the tail of this thread kept pulling away as I kept reading further.
I plan on starting my LCD projector sometime in the relativly near future. It seems that the lighting source has settled on the 400W MH. As far as the optics go its a toss up/free for all, but the basic concept of it is pretty solid with a few working ideas. The only thing that hasn't been settled to any resembleance of conformity that I can see is the LCD. I'm just going to look around untill I find a 800x600 6" LCD. that seems like it would be perfect. I'm sure its been looked for before but I'm pretty resiliant and confident that I will find it. I don't have anything to contribute at the moment, but I will be attempting to put up a comprehensive page with most of the basics recapping everything in this thread.
PS:
its not really my place to complain or anything, but im surprised noone has mentioned anything earlier. prjctr_builder, you act like a spoiled b*tch. you expect everyone to do everything for you and then b*tch at everyone when things don't go your way even though all they've been trying to do is help you. grow some gratitude man.
Re: done with the behemoth of a thread
Yeah the 400MH bulb seems to be correct route to go from what i keep reading.
as for the person you mentionned... I would agree. He will b!@ch but then he comes back. he can't help it. He knows how impoartant we are to him succeeding in building a projector 😀
This may be mean, but because he acts that way, i usually try not to reply to his posts. I mean he calls me a fool for telling him the truth.... :rollseyes: then gets mad because he bought the wrong lcd panel... but he never seemed to have read a post after the thread about the panel he was going to buy.
bah life goes on 😀
I say, if you can't find an 800x600 panel.. get a 1650... i saw some pics here of a 1650 and it seemed to be pretty good quality.
Good luck 🙂
phazei said:
Yeah the 400MH bulb seems to be correct route to go from what i keep reading.
as for the person you mentionned... I would agree. He will b!@ch but then he comes back. he can't help it. He knows how impoartant we are to him succeeding in building a projector 😀
This may be mean, but because he acts that way, i usually try not to reply to his posts. I mean he calls me a fool for telling him the truth.... :rollseyes: then gets mad because he bought the wrong lcd panel... but he never seemed to have read a post after the thread about the panel he was going to buy.
bah life goes on 😀
I say, if you can't find an 800x600 panel.. get a 1650... i saw some pics here of a 1650 and it seemed to be pretty good quality.
Good luck 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.