[The News Bot]

Optoma have released further details on their ThemeScene HD86 full HD projector due at the start of November 2009.* The new unit offers easy lens change for shorter or longer throw ratios,* an Ansi contrast claim of 700:1 and Puremotion 2 frame interpolation.* Here are the full details… New ThemeScene HD86 1080p Projector with Full [...]
More...

[j0hn]

ThemeScene also offer an anamorphic lens for fully automated Constant Height Projection.

better if they just made it standard and be done with it.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by j0hn

better if they just made it standard and be done with it.

What, you think every projector should be fitted with an anamorphic lens as standard?

Steve W

[j0hn]

yes because the vast majority who have owned PJs will agree, those who havent wont understand.

[Pecker]

The problems are numerous.

Firstly, Blu-ray Disc is a native 16:9 format, with 'scope films only using the central part of the 16:9 image. Of course, it's possible to scale & squeeze an image so that it can then be unsqueezed by the lens, but this isn't how Blu-ray Disc was designed.

Secondly, I'm not aware of any lens which can be placed on to an anamorphic lens which can convert it back to 16:9. You subsequently lose the entire market of people who can only have 16:9 or 2.05:1 CIA screens due to the limitations of their rooms.

Thirdly an anamorphic lens is extremely expensive. Even at the budget end of £500 a pop you'd be doubling the price of a PJ like the HD65, adding 50% to the HD20, etc.

Fourthly, 2.35:1 CIH screens tend to be far more expensive than 16:9 screens, adding yet more to the overall cost.

Fifthly, not everyone would agree with you that the majority of PJ owners agree that all PJs should be anamorphic. There have been numerous lively discussions here about CIW vs CIH vs CIA, and even some of CIH's biggest supporters say that CIH is not always the best option.

Steve W

[Phil Hinton]

Originally Posted by Pecker

The problems are numerous.

Firstly, Blu-ray Disc is a native 16:9 format, with 'scope films only using the central part of the 16:9 image. Of course, it's possible to scale & squeeze an image so that it can then be unsqueezed by the lens, but this isn't how Blu-ray Disc was designed.

Secondly, I'm not aware of any lens which can be placed on to an anamorphic lens which can convert it back to 16:9. You subsequently lose the entire market of people who can only have 16:9 or 2.05:1 CIA screens due to the limitations of their rooms.

Thirdly an anamorphic lens is extremely expensive. Even at the budget end of £500 a pop you'd be doubling the price of a PJ like the HD65, adding 50% to the HD20, etc.

Fourthly, 2.35:1 CIH screens tend to be far more expensive than 16:9 screens, adding yet more to the overall cost.

Fifthly, not everyone would agree with you that the majority of PJ owners agree that all PJs should be anamorphic. There have been numerous lively discussions here about CIW vs CIH vs CIA, and even some of CIH's biggest supporters say that CIH is not always the best option.

Steve W

Just to add some balance.

First. Steve is right about how Blu-ray is and what the Spec (as it stands) currently says for anamorphic versions etc. It would require the BD spec to change which while it shouldn't be ruled out, (3D adoption has meant it needs to be rewritten) it is not likely to happen. However, DVD was never designed to be upscaled yet everyone does that these days. There are no major issues in a squeeze function that most projectors now offer as long as the processing is done right and I have yet to see any add in serious issues.

Second. Runco were the first manufacturer to offer a projector with a lens as part of the chassis of the projector. This was switchable between 1.78:1 and 2.35:1 material with no major issues. It was a prism design that stayed in pace at the front of the unit. Some other lenses allow a switch through mode that changes between 1.78:1 and 2.35:1 material. Again there are many options and price levels in this growing market.

Third. Anamorphic is expensive with quality solutions starting at about £1400. However that was unheard of just 12 months ago so there are more options becoming available all the time. Manufacturers, dealers and trade bodies all support the approach so as it becomes more popular price may become more reasonable. However, with any quality solution to offer the best quality of image, it will remain an option for those in the mid to high end market place and is not really an option for the lower end of the market due to costs that will always be there. This is not what I would call a problem, anyone in this market is looking for quality so the projector and lens will be of high quality. The HD86 is offered with Optoma's own solution which will cost about £3k to the price of the HD86. Thats still far lower than where we were a year ago. Finding a quality solution that includes a projector and Lens is now well under the £10k price point. That has to be welcomed.

Fourth. A quality scope screen will cost you the same as a quality 16:9 screen. There are fewer budget options at this time, but a decent scope screen will set you back about £500 upwards, the same starting point I would recommend for a quality 16:9 screen. So, I don't see that as an issue.

Fifth. Any dealer, manufacturer and expert will spec a system to what suits the room being used. This is the first and most important point. CIH will not work as well in some small rooms, like single garage conversions as you don't have the width to keep the same 16:9 image size. However, there are also far more who can fit a wider screen and the options are open to them to consider. There is also the cheap and cheerful zoom method which can also be adopted by users in the budget to mid end. So lots of options available.

The best thing is get lots of advice on your set up and room and look at the solutions available to you. There are plenty of options available and not one is better than others in all cases. However, looking at the entire market there is a steady rise in high-end solutions all being specified and built to accomodate the anamorphic approach by installers. Most manufacturers have also gone with this approach with only one offering a zoom function with auto lens technology and this is in the lower end of the market. The zoom method certainly allows more options for CIA and CIH, but tellingly no other manufacturer this year has added in the technology to their ranges. We will have to wait and see if this changes next year, but most have had a year to follow Panasonic and none have so far. Of course any projector will do this, its just a manual affair on each change.

[Pecker]

So, in response to the OP, do you think all projectors should be fitted with an anamorphic lens as standard?

Steve W