1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Normal TV and DVD, not HDTV. Which PJ ?

Discussion in 'Projectors, Screens & Video Processors' started by madhatter, Jan 28, 2005.

  1. madhatter

    madhatter
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi.

    Made a few postings on here recently and Im getting some great feedback, so thank for everyone who contributes.

    Having read the review on projector central of the ptae 700, it seems that it might actually be more than I need. As I mentioned in other posts, I only anticipate connecting the PJ to my DVD player, just using the 'cinema' for watching films.

    Is the Panny more than I need ? I'll only be feeding it with standard DVD video, none of the high def stuff. Would I be better of going for a lower cost 854 x 480 machine ? Will I benefit from the 1280 x 720 native resolution of the panny ?

    My point is, I wont see the benefit of anything capable of displaying a resolution greater than that of the source.... will I ?

    Do you know, Im an electronics engineer for a radar systems company so I am pretty clued up on all the technical nonsense that flies around the world.... but I just can't get my head round this ..... :confused: :confused:

    Why am I being so stupid.

    Chris.
     
  2. hebawom

    hebawom
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Messages:
    187
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Matlock
    Ratings:
    +0
    Recently someone posted that the pixels in an LCD make up 50-60% of the image - the remaining percentage is the gaps inbetween the pixels. If you buy a 1280x720 PJ that equals 921,600 pixels. The visable gaps will be much less with that many pixels. Also you are future proofing a bit.
    If you ever went down the HTPC route, you could upscale your image to above 1280x720 to produce a sharper image.
     
  3. KraGorn

    KraGorn
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,740
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Warrington
    Ratings:
    +27
    Hi Chris,

    Not stupid, you're making an excellent point. :)

    There are many arguments that can be deployed in this discussion depending on one's own point and view and usage of one's home cinema. I started with an AE300 (9??x540 IIRC) on a 92" screen. After the initial 'wow' had worn off it became apparent that good though the 300 was for minimal screen-door at the size I was projecting (viewing from 11') the resolution was too small.

    I changed that for a Sanyo Z2, 1280x720. A lot better in many respects so it's not really helpful to compare directly, however it's safe to say screen-door and pixellation were no longer issues I was bothered about.

    Some time later I decided to switch to DLPs and settled on a Sharp Z200E, this is 1024x576. One of the main reasons for choosing that, and one that is still valid IMHO, is that thre is no need to up-scale SD material. As soon as you do up-scaling you introduce problems in terms of the quality of the scaling, the inevitable image softening that occurs, etc. etc.

    In practice this theory held, the image was crisp because it wasn't being massaged, however pixellation had returned as an annoyance. Now it has to be said, different flaws in images affect people in different ways, in my case after some time I found the pixellation annoying so I am now using an Optoma H77 back at 1280x720. As a result I'm now on the quest to find the best scaling, meaning minimal softening .. never ending, this obsession. :D

    Soooooo, what this long ramble is trying to say is that 1280x720 is not some nirvana in terms of SD movie projection, as you realise, and that IMX and IMHO there are times when lesser resolutions are more appropriate.

    The only thing I would say is that 854x480 is probably too much in the opposite direction, that's lower than the AE300 .. but again I think the key factor is size of screen and how far away you'll be viewing, pixellation diminishes with increased distance, image softening doesn't.

    Hpe something here is helpful. ;)
     
  4. Gary Lightfoot

    Gary Lightfoot
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,152
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Surrey. UK.
    Ratings:
    +1,956
    1024 x 576 is ideal for PAL, though upscaling for NTSC will be required, though most home cinema pjs do a pretty good job of this, as do those that upscale PAL to 1280 x 720 (and NTSC too of course).

    Seating distance can have a bearing on resolution - the closer you sit, the more resolution you will need so that pixel structure doesn't become an issue when viewing. SO, if you know how big a screen you want, and how close you will be sitting, that can help with your choice of pj and resolution.

    Good black level and good contrast as well as image colour and processing are important points to look for in a projector, which is why demoing is important.

    Infocus produce some good value DLP projectors, and the latest is the 5000 which is 1280 x 720 and has a reasonably good contrast ratio of around 1200:1. Infocus quote accurate calibrated numbers generaly - when the pj is calibrated for correct colour. Many will give theoretical maximum contrast which is for an uncalibrated and unwatchable image, so try to find the accurate figures for other manufacturers if contrast is a factor for you.

    So, tell us your screen size, seating distance and budget, and we will see what projectors we can suggest for you to demo.

    HTH

    Gary.
     
  5. Gary Lightfoot

    Gary Lightfoot
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,152
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Surrey. UK.
    Ratings:
    +1,956
    Blimey, I thought my reply was the first when I was typing it. :)

    Gary.
     
  6. madhatter

    madhatter
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well, PJ will be 10.5 feet (havnt converted to metric yet !!!!) from the wall.

    Seating will be directly beneath projector, so about 10 feet.

    Seems it is generaly better to just get as high a resolution PJ as the budget allows. is this a fair statement ?

    Cheers for the great replies.

    Chris.
     
  7. Gary Lightfoot

    Gary Lightfoot
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2001
    Messages:
    12,152
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Surrey. UK.
    Ratings:
    +1,956
    That's a reasonable statement I would say especialy if seating distance is a factor.

    If you're sitting 10ft from the screen, then you should not go any larger than 6ft with a 1280 x 720 DLP, and probably no larger than 5ft wide with an LCD of the same resolution - but this does depend on the projector, as some LCD models employ a method of reducing the pixel grid (screendoor), so again, a demo is the only way to know.

    A slight defocusing of the lens can reduce screendoor without noticably affecting the image, so should you be able to see the screendoor, you may be able to hide it.

    Gary.
     
  8. benji_m

    benji_m
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    707
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Lancashire
    Ratings:
    +6
    In the interests of realism and fairness we always start off an AE700 demo with standard def material from a £100 DVD player through component. And I can comprehensively say that the reduction in pixel grid from previous models make it worthwhile, nevermind all the other benefits.
     

Share This Page

Loading...