Re: Re: So which is Pepsi
Kalle Peru my friend, nice try.....but no chance!
It's CR might not be top flight, but it small, light, quiet, fast, native SVGA, and auto everything. It is one of the best PJ panels around.
BTW, I gave up on the Panaflat....200 screws later and still dissassembling -it seems like the backlight is virtually welded to the panel itself! I just use it as a spare monitor now.
Kalle Peru said:
Kalle Peru my friend, nice try.....but no chance!
It's CR might not be top flight, but it small, light, quiet, fast, native SVGA, and auto everything. It is one of the best PJ panels around.
BTW, I gave up on the Panaflat....200 screws later and still dissassembling -it seems like the backlight is virtually welded to the panel itself! I just use it as a spare monitor now.
kardas said:
Yep, about 1.90m
Sorry Kardas, as you might know in the UK, we're sort of halfway inbetween European metric and American imperial measures - We supposedly went metric in 1971, but not many people here seem to have realised that yet!
nice comparison henrik_mork first i think B looks better
but for the life of me i cant see 9000-9500 difference in lumens
between the 2 comparisons
i guess lumen specs alone dont tell the whole story
when your looking for a ohp for lcd projection
but for the life of me i cant see 9000-9500 difference in lumens
between the 2 comparisons
i guess lumen specs alone dont tell the whole story
when your looking for a ohp for lcd projection
well it apprears that (B) may look better, but im willing to bet its halogen. (A) looks alot whiter indicating that it is metal halide. I'm sure im wrong though! 😀
hmmmm i think it MORE than just lighting....
i think B has better optics...im pretty sure its the halogen he said the halogen is better than his 575 in his other post...🙂
ok now where my pepsi? 😎
i think B has better optics...im pretty sure its the halogen he said the halogen is better than his 575 in his other post...🙂
ok now where my pepsi? 😎
Cameras
One important thing to remember is that most digicams automatically adjust the f/stop and exposure time. To get a good comparison shot the camera needs to be setup the same for both shots. This usaullly means adjusting the settings manually, if the camera will allow.
One important thing to remember is that most digicams automatically adjust the f/stop and exposure time. To get a good comparison shot the camera needs to be setup the same for both shots. This usaullly means adjusting the settings manually, if the camera will allow.
Re: Re: Re: So which is Pepsi
nobody likes me
no problem... if you ever need money...
David
henrik_mork said:
nobody likes me no problem... if you ever need money...
David
Re: Cameras
Bixs, there may be some truth in what you say, however I would say that the pictures are a good representation of what my own eyes saw in the room when I took these pictures - thats really why I started this thread because I was so amazed at the small performance difference when actually using these PJ's to watch DVDs.
Clearly the brightness of the two images is slightly different, as is the colour intensity - the digicam doesn't seem to have automatically equalized the images.
Results revealed in about 10 hours time!
bixs said:
Bixs, there may be some truth in what you say, however I would say that the pictures are a good representation of what my own eyes saw in the room when I took these pictures - thats really why I started this thread because I was so amazed at the small performance difference when actually using these PJ's to watch DVDs.
Clearly the brightness of the two images is slightly different, as is the colour intensity - the digicam doesn't seem to have automatically equalized the images.
Results revealed in about 10 hours time!
The results
It' about an hour early, but that shouldn't bother our American friends who are probably tucked up in bed at the moment (3.53 EST).
Arise Sir Negative Design, Sir qui_999, and Sir Verbose Mustafa!
You three honourable gentlemen correctly identified 'B' as being Halogen. Verbose's reasoning that it looked more white hit the nail on the head. ND said he thought the optics were better in 'B', and I would agree with him, insofar ar the condensor lens in 'B' is fatter than in 'A'...(is that a good thing, and does it make any difference?)...., and I think the overhead lens in 'B' is slightly better quality.
I'd love for someone to explain where the 9000 lumens difference is in these images. Also it was interesting nearly everyone said they preferred 'B'.
Thanks guys for your responses and opinions. It would be great if we could post small video clips - particularly in the 'Post your results' thread. I will be posting proper pictures there soon of my home set-up.
It' about an hour early, but that shouldn't bother our American friends who are probably tucked up in bed at the moment (3.53 EST).
Arise Sir Negative Design, Sir qui_999, and Sir Verbose Mustafa!
You three honourable gentlemen correctly identified 'B' as being Halogen. Verbose's reasoning that it looked more white hit the nail on the head. ND said he thought the optics were better in 'B', and I would agree with him, insofar ar the condensor lens in 'B' is fatter than in 'A'...(is that a good thing, and does it make any difference?)...., and I think the overhead lens in 'B' is slightly better quality.
I'd love for someone to explain where the 9000 lumens difference is in these images. Also it was interesting nearly everyone said they preferred 'B'.
Thanks guys for your responses and opinions. It would be great if we could post small video clips - particularly in the 'Post your results' thread. I will be posting proper pictures there soon of my home set-up.
Just goes to show..
Hey, a lurker here on the board.. coming forward
I'm a total newb but I'm beginning my foray into the DIY projector scene and so I've been trying to get up to speed by reading.. and reading.. and reading. I think I've spent 3-4 hours reading every night for the past two weeks or so!
Anyway, I'm not sure how the insides of these two OHPs are but I'd be interested to see the MH lamp using the optics in the halogen OHP. I don't suppose its possible 🙄 but it'd be interesting to see.. maybe get the best of both worlds 😀
Hey, a lurker here on the board.. coming forward
I'm a total newb but I'm beginning my foray into the DIY projector scene and so I've been trying to get up to speed by reading.. and reading.. and reading. I think I've spent 3-4 hours reading every night for the past two weeks or so!
Anyway, I'm not sure how the insides of these two OHPs are but I'd be interested to see the MH lamp using the optics in the halogen OHP. I don't suppose its possible 🙄 but it'd be interesting to see.. maybe get the best of both worlds 😀
The MH is going.....
I'm selling it...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3030960818&category=22610&rd=1
I'm selling it...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3030960818&category=22610&rd=1
It's a nice way to compare two different OHPs, but this is no way a reasonable comparison of MH to halogen. First of all, there is the issue with the pictures. Not much you can do about that unless you buy a bunch of people plane tickets. You say they represent the images well. I doubt that, because they both look like absolute garbage (no offense), and they're both extremely pixellated (so I assume it's the camera). Then there's the different optics of the ohps to consider. Now how many hours have gone through the MH? MH bulbs get dim and yellow after extended use. And if the fresnel is not in or near the "sweet spot", any light source will look bad.
What about calibrating the LCD? You'd want to adjust the contrast as well as the color settings to be as good as it can for each projector. Using the same setting for both is going to be biased towards one OHP or the other.
Halogens cannot replicate daylight color temp. It's just not a reality of physics. MH bulbs, when you get the right kind and they're new, can replicate daylight. Halogens also put out MUCH more heat per lumen than MH bulbs, so that's also something to consider.
A better comparison, would be to use a custom built PJ (not two different OHPs), and try the same thing with two different lamps, while leaving everything else in tact and adjusting the LCD on each for optimal settings.
What about calibrating the LCD? You'd want to adjust the contrast as well as the color settings to be as good as it can for each projector. Using the same setting for both is going to be biased towards one OHP or the other.
Halogens cannot replicate daylight color temp. It's just not a reality of physics. MH bulbs, when you get the right kind and they're new, can replicate daylight. Halogens also put out MUCH more heat per lumen than MH bulbs, so that's also something to consider.
A better comparison, would be to use a custom built PJ (not two different OHPs), and try the same thing with two different lamps, while leaving everything else in tact and adjusting the LCD on each for optimal settings.
Ok, I just looked at both very carefully.
There is major hotspotting on the Paramount logo for both projectors. What kind of screen are you using? What are your contrast settings? The left side of the mountain is not supposed to glow like that.
Now for the other picture (is that Wonder Boys?), the skin tones look too white on PJ A, and the yellowish tint on B makes it look more realistic from our extremely limited perspective. Since the whites are too hot A (as seen in the Paramount pic), the gain is too high on the screen and/or the contrast, color, and gamma settings badly need to be adjusted.
So that's whats wrong with A. Lets see what's wrong with B. The skin tones are yellowish, making it look a little more natural (compared to blazing hot white). Lets look at some other things. Look at the kid on the right's shirt. That is clearly supposed to be a white shirt. Look at the collar espescially. I think it looks much better in A.
You should really calibrate both PJs with color bars. Then take pictures of the color bars. I'm willing to bet that on projector A, your two white bars will look like one, and on B, they'll both look brownish or yellowish.
There is major hotspotting on the Paramount logo for both projectors. What kind of screen are you using? What are your contrast settings? The left side of the mountain is not supposed to glow like that.
Now for the other picture (is that Wonder Boys?), the skin tones look too white on PJ A, and the yellowish tint on B makes it look more realistic from our extremely limited perspective. Since the whites are too hot A (as seen in the Paramount pic), the gain is too high on the screen and/or the contrast, color, and gamma settings badly need to be adjusted.
So that's whats wrong with A. Lets see what's wrong with B. The skin tones are yellowish, making it look a little more natural (compared to blazing hot white). Lets look at some other things. Look at the kid on the right's shirt. That is clearly supposed to be a white shirt. Look at the collar espescially. I think it looks much better in A.
You should really calibrate both PJs with color bars. Then take pictures of the color bars. I'm willing to bet that on projector A, your two white bars will look like one, and on B, they'll both look brownish or yellowish.
This is what we want!
Lifter, good man!
This is what we want, some vigorous debate - I certainly don't claim to have all the answers - but all the issues you raise spur me on to refine the experiment further.
I making a list of your questions and will answer some here - now, and then also re-run the comparison over the weekend.
Lifter, good man!
This is what we want, some vigorous debate - I certainly don't claim to have all the answers - but all the issues you raise spur me on to refine the experiment further.
I making a list of your questions and will answer some here - now, and then also re-run the comparison over the weekend.
Basically, your white levels are way too high on both. Since "white" on a halogen is really yellow, it actually makes the halogen pic look better on this horribly uncalibrated setup (either that or your camera is pure and utter garbage), especially on the skin tones. But that certainly doesn't mean it should be preferred. The hotspotting is worse on A, which could be a result of one or two positive things. One, it's a lot brighter. Two, the whites are really white and not yellow.
Again, get a screen w/ lower gain. Then get some color bars and calibrate. Unless the optics are much worse on the MH OHP, or unless it's bulb is not appropriate, I can garantee you that it's much better.
Personally, I can't imagine anyone with fuctional taste buds who can't tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. I can tell the difference between Coke at McDonalds and Coke at Jack-in-the-Box. Coke and Pepsi is like night and day to me.
Again, get a screen w/ lower gain. Then get some color bars and calibrate. Unless the optics are much worse on the MH OHP, or unless it's bulb is not appropriate, I can garantee you that it's much better.
Personally, I can't imagine anyone with fuctional taste buds who can't tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. I can tell the difference between Coke at McDonalds and Coke at Jack-in-the-Box. Coke and Pepsi is like night and day to me.
Okay, some answers
The pictures were a bit of a let-down, I admit that, for the next run I'll try and use a tripod or something to avoid the appearance of pixellation - cos the images looked pretty sharp to me when I was projecting them.
I didn't take offense at the comment that they were both absolute garbage, perhaps "not very good" might have been a bit fairer, but its a free country!
Before I go any further, I should perhaps say I wholeheartedly agree that MH gives a much cleaner light, and has the capability to give greater integrity to an image, and also to render colours much more faithfully than halogen -
...the thrust of my argument is that I just don't see the MH image being 5 or 6 times brighter than the halogen (2500 lumens compared to 12000 lumens).
It might be a tad simplifying the situation, but IMHO, many people tend to have the following assumptions:
1. More lumens = Better image
2. Metal Halide vs. Halogen = Mercedes Benz vs. Supermarket Cart
3. You'll never get a set-up that performs really well unless you go down the MH route
I want to give heart to people who can only afford a junkyard 2500 lumens halogen OHP that if they set everything up right, they can give the MH enthusiasts a run for their money!
Many of the points raised concern calibration and optics and again - I agree wholeheartedly.
IMHO, those two aspects are equally, if not more important than how bright the light source is
The lamp in the MH is only around 100 hours old - but I will re-run the test and post pics on this thread.
I will replace the lens in the MH, and recalibrate both PJ's with colour bars as you advise. The projection surface is a matt white painted display board - not a high gain surface of any kind. I will use a 1:1 gain 8ft tripod screen instead if you think that is better.
Watch this space
The pictures were a bit of a let-down, I admit that, for the next run I'll try and use a tripod or something to avoid the appearance of pixellation - cos the images looked pretty sharp to me when I was projecting them.
I didn't take offense at the comment that they were both absolute garbage, perhaps "not very good" might have been a bit fairer, but its a free country!
Before I go any further, I should perhaps say I wholeheartedly agree that MH gives a much cleaner light, and has the capability to give greater integrity to an image, and also to render colours much more faithfully than halogen -
...the thrust of my argument is that I just don't see the MH image being 5 or 6 times brighter than the halogen (2500 lumens compared to 12000 lumens).
It might be a tad simplifying the situation, but IMHO, many people tend to have the following assumptions:
1. More lumens = Better image
2. Metal Halide vs. Halogen = Mercedes Benz vs. Supermarket Cart
3. You'll never get a set-up that performs really well unless you go down the MH route
I want to give heart to people who can only afford a junkyard 2500 lumens halogen OHP that if they set everything up right, they can give the MH enthusiasts a run for their money!
Many of the points raised concern calibration and optics and again - I agree wholeheartedly.
IMHO, those two aspects are equally, if not more important than how bright the light source is
The lamp in the MH is only around 100 hours old - but I will re-run the test and post pics on this thread.
I will replace the lens in the MH, and recalibrate both PJ's with colour bars as you advise. The projection surface is a matt white painted display board - not a high gain surface of any kind. I will use a 1:1 gain 8ft tripod screen instead if you think that is better.
Watch this space
thanks mork i was wondering about converting from hologen but i dont think il bother now as i only want a small image and its bright enough. I`ll spend the extra money on better speakers which i think is more improtant anyway to feel the film. the new lot of softwere dvd players also look like them will be able to compensate for colour differences anyway.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.