Why is the camp so split over the Pearl 'image'?

[Steve.EX]

It seems there are some very knowledgable fellows out there who understand image quality/presentation.
So why do some like and some loathe the Pearl image, can this be accurately defined/described? This does not seem in line with the general consensus with DLP for example where despite an acknowledgement that the sharpness of DLP can be interpreted as a more digital 'take' than LCD/CRT it is generally acknowledged that rainbows asides most people like the positives of (i.e) the IN76, 7210 etc.
I have read the reviews and the Pearl does indeed seem to tail off at the very highest frequency extremes but this imo is not representitive of just how 'soft' some people report it to be.
Do they really mean soft or is it perhaps 'perceived' as smooth given a high fill-rate?
I am confident that colour rendition (with a little work) will be as saturated as i would hope for and indeed contrast will be much better than i am used too, but this sharpness lark is of concern to me. As with music i am a detail freak. Whilst i like DLP i have discounted it due to my perception of rainbows. Whether i am overly sensitive to it i am not sure but having seen this on several PJ's and the effect it has on films like Sin City, which was rendered almost unwatchable to me, DLP is a flawed (like everything else) technology for me right now.
I will have to travel some distance to view a Pearl, which i honestly want to be good enough to warrant the immediate purchase.
I am very curious, but wonder at the (respected) opinions of several of the old hand members here and the split in opinion.
Do you really mean soft as i understand soft to mean?

[Steve.EX]

Also can anyone confirm or deny as too whether the reported Pal/2:2 cadence issue has been resolved?

Thanks

Steven

[Steve.EX]

Also is it a sealed optic assembly or is it (relatively) exposed to dust. if so how easy is to clean/service?
The upshot of all this is that i am very shortly about to move to a new property and this is, in all honesty, most likely my last expensive AV purchase for quite a while. I am very very happy with the audio abilities of my current kit so this upgrade will need to be a well judged purpose as i will not be upgrading my new PJ for a few years to come (financial restrictions and all )

[Gordon @ Convergent AV]

My own take on it is that folk do not understand or are not used to projectors with the "look" of Pearl. It is able to resolve 1920 x1080 on/off lines. You can see each individual pixel if you stand close to the screen.

Look out a window. Life is NOT sharp. Life is smooth. Edges of objects are smooth....but there is detail within all this. Artificial edge enhancement caused by poor scaling, sharpness controls, screen door effect poor fill factor, are becoming things of the past.

I think sharp looking images also come from the ability to have high ansi contrasts though. IE The ability to have a bright white pixel and the black one beside it still remain black rather than look grey. That is one of the areas that something like a SIM2D80 has Pearl beaten. It is twice the price though.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I've got the use of a very highly regarded 720P DLP PJ at home. It was knocked in to next year on image quality by the Pearl I had in for a client. Both were used with an external video processor and both were calibrated, not on out the box settings.

Just my 2p..... I'm sure others wil disagree.

Gordon

[Steve.EX]

Gordon.

I most heartily agree with your statement regarding percieved detail in relation to contrast.
This was most poigniantly (abeit crudely) proved to my friend just the other night when i hauled my PJ, A1 and sit-up-and-beg 16:9 pull-up screen (with a 1.1 gain) to my friends.
I have long extolled the virtues of using a (decent) screen to him as he insists on projecting onto a large magnolia wall. It was not until this night and day demo that he finally saw the light. I was determined to go through with this demo as i have long used a reasonable (all be it manual) screen. My friend is about to step up to HD status with an impending new PJ purchase (much like myself) and either $ky HD or E1 or perhaps both. My mission was to try and get him to offset a little of his PJ budget to put towards a screen.

It took precisely 2 minutes for the dawning of the light to hit him. Whilst there are obviously several factors at work, what was absolutely apparent (and even to a mildly blind person imo) was the perceived lost in fine detail in the HD King Kong jungle scenes we were playing with.
Although obviously that low level detail was still there, you were just not aware of it.
This was very much as i had expected and known it to be but for my friend it was little short of startling.


Interesting your comments on the Pearl and very much in line with my own 'guesses' (having not yet seen it). Yet i am sure elsewhere i had read that you would choose an older 720 design over the Pearl given the choice.
I am reasonably aware of the implications of owning a 1080 device and well realise that only if all other things are equal then a higher res panel will/may offer something above a lower spec'd machine.
I dearly like the thought of owning a Pearl, but i guess like everyone else wants hard, proven facts (from someone else) that it really is the best thing since sliced bread.
Are you aware of any improvements to the 2:2 issue, which to be fair is probably the least of my concerns right now given that i will not own any variant of $ky and have only perhaps 2% Pal discs (and intent to keep it that way only buying if no other option exists), watching terrestrial through it is also of no relevance to me.

thanks

Steven

[Gordon @ Convergent AV]

Steve: My comment on the other thread about 720P DLP and the Pearl was exactly the opposite. I will now have to dig it out and clarify my point....I have no further knowledge on PAL 2:2 with the units.
Gordon

[Steve.EX]

I also agree with the 'life is not like that' statement.
I think people have gotten used to using photoshop or something, wacked out to mega-giga resolutions.
Back in the real world, can you see the stitching to your friends black suit at 15 feet in darkness? Of course you can't!

This is where a split and analogy (of sorts) does exist between the DLP and CRT camps.
DLP (to me) does and can seem very sharp, almost excessively so sometimes to an almost digital 'feel' as opposed to CRTs more glossy look.
I liken this to the vinyl vs cd camps.

Steven

[Steve.EX]

Gordon.
I am sure you are aware but your web link in your signature is experiencing 'technical difficulties'

Steven

[recruit]

Have a look Steve at some of the shots on my thread below and tell me what you think about the Pearls PQ ?

The Sony VPL-VW50 Thread AKA " Pearl "

[Steve.EX]

Originally Posted by recruit

Have a look Steve at some of the shots on my thread below and tell me what you think about the Pearls PQ ?

The Sony VPL-VW50 Thread AKA " Pearl "

Yes, i had seen those.
Unfortunately on (either of) my laptops it is not telling me 'enough' (my prob not yours )

What PJ(s) did you have prior to this?

Steven

[recruit]

Originally Posted by Steve.EX

Yes, i had seen those.
Unfortunately on (either of) my laptops it is not telling me 'enough' (my prob not yours )

What PJ(s) did you have prior to this?

Steven

I had a Themescene HD72i which was nice but not anywhere near the quality of the Pearl, also had a Ruby for a week and demod an IN76 and have also seen Runco PJ's and a couple of Sims...

[Steve.EX]

Although i do not want DLP, i thought the IN76 to be a competent PJ. As a benchmark i can relate to how do you feel the Pearl compares, is it better on all counts?
Given the IN can be picked up for less than £1000 these days does the Pearl offer VFM on the same scale. I have read that it is on a whole different level but opinions are always subjective?
Whilst i am sure i will make the (very) long journey to demo the Pearl, i am always wary of demos in an enviroment that is not my own.
Hopefully they will at least have other PJ's by which i am able to establish comparison benchmarks.

Steven

[recruit]

Well i prefered the HD72i to the IN76

[Gordon @ Convergent AV]

Steve, Links work fine to me. Which one do you have problem with

Gordon

[Avi]

Originally Posted by Steve.EX

Yes, i had seen those.
Unfortunately on (either of) my laptops it is not telling me 'enough' (my prob not yours )

What PJ(s) did you have prior to this?

Steven

Steve

I spent some time with the Optoma HD81 before opting for the Pearl. I certainly don't think the Pearl looks soft but the image is different to DLP.

I guess it comes down to your image preference at the end of the day and for me it was the Pearl.

AVI