2.35:1 projected at constant height screen

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Hi Rodolfo,

From my blog...

The high performance 2.35 anamorphic method is to view 4:3 and 16:9
content just as you always would on your 2.35 screen masking the left
and right sides with curtains or something similar to match the image
width. When watching 2.35 content an anamorphic lens drops down in front
of the projector lens stretching the width to the edges of the screen
which will make people short and fat just like stretching 4:3 content to
fill out a 16:9 screen. That geometry error is fixed by using an
external scaler that supports custom setups which stretches the image
vertically to fill out the screen top and bottom correcting the error.
In the end you have fully maximized the available resolution and light
output of the projector for a 2.35 presentation.

Starting out I am going to do this using an inexpensive route which I am
going to coin as "Zoom 2.35 Anamorphic". For 16:9 and 4:3 content
nothing changes. For 2.35 content the zoom is adjusted to fill out the
screen left to right and the tilt is used to recenter the image top and
bottom. The price paid for this is image brightness as the top and
bottom black bars will still exist but will be over scanning the native
2.35 screen. This equates to about a 25% decrease in light output. There
are also debates centered around using all pixels available on the
projector to scale for the best response. When my 1080P system finally
arrives I will switch to the high performance 2.35 anamorphic method.

Update: not so sure I will. There are nit picky imaging problems with
the anamorphic lens, requires a special and expensive screen, it will
only bea s good as the scaling. I am satisified by the zoom method at
this time and am hard pressed to justify doing it the other way and deal
with the errors that will create.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5907

And guys and gals, feel free to start yours!

Beyond that we, Custom HT, are discussing how we can provide this to
customers in an automated fashion besides buying a Cinewide Runco system
which suffers from the same errors. Would love to find a decent FP that
supports remote zoom and focus and the killer would be actual presets
for zoom and focus.

Rodolfo, no matter how you do it YOU are going to LOVE it!!! I am in
film heaven finally after all these years. Have demoed it for a few and
they were blown away. Unfortunately, you guessed it, first comment is
"why doesn't everything fill out the screen".

ARGH

So many folks STILL don't get it...



Richard Fisher
HD Library is Published by Tech Services
A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Rodolfo La Maestra - HDTV Magazine wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Richard,
>
> I did not know you had a constant height screen setup for your projector, we should talk Richard, I
> am doing a project like that for my HT.
>
> Why is it that you need to zoom then?, aren't you using an anamorphic lens in front of the projector
> to make the image wider and maintain the height on 2:35:1 content? Which requires the encoding by
> your scaler of course, a feature your Lumagen might be able to do.
>
> In other words:
>
> The screen height is maintained the same, the screen width changes, and the scaler and anamorphic
> lens compensate for squeezing/unsqueezing, not the projector's zoom.
>
> The scaler encodes anamorphic lateral compression for 2.35:1 content while scaling to the native
> resolution of the projector chip, the projector uses all of its chip pixels vertically (no pixels
> misused for black bars), and your system automatically (or manually) clicks in the anamorphic lens
> in front of the projector's lens (you buy separately of course) to unsqueeze the anamorphic lateral
> compression created by the scaler. No zooming, no loss in the usage of the projector chip
> resolution for black bars, some vertical scaling of course to fill the chip.
>
> http://www.prismasonic.com/english/intro.shtml#2
>
> You can also install a screen that electronically makes the sides wider for 2.35:1 content and
> retracts itself back to watch 1.78:1 (16:9) HDTV, maintaining the same screen height, something like
> the new Stewart, another possibility is to use side masking on a larger 16:9 screen.
>
> With a smart remote you could sync all the electronic and physical actions on the pieces of the
> system, including electric curtains opening to the 2:.35:1 width, absolutely cool.
>
> The objective would be to maximize the use of the resolution of the projector's 16:9 chip for 2.35:1
> (and wider) images, avoiding the waste of top/bottom chip cells for black bars.
>
> How your setup is now doing it now? please email me privately if this subject becomes out of the
> Tips list objective.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Richard Fisher
> Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 3:00 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: New SXRD's Announced
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> RAF,
>
> The NEED for 1080P is one of two:
>
> 1. It is the newest technology, the numbers are bigger so it must be
> better regardless of application. I'll throw in a the new toy aspect as
> well.
>
> 2. Your viewing distance is less than 4 screen heights and you can see
> the pixels of the imaging device. Those at 3 screen heights are likely
> pushing this aspect of performance.
>
> Not many use 3 screen heights. I do plus a 2.35 constant height screen
> using zoom which makes the pixels even larger. 1080P is on my list! at
> 3.5 screen heights and no 2.35 constant height setup I could easily wait
> and/or not even care.
>
> The wisdom of Alan Brown's response to work with a professional should
> be given careful consideration. We can save folks money or apply that HT
> funding to other areas that would create a much greater cost/benefit
> ratio for improving performance.
>
> Thanks
>
> Richard Fisher
> HD Library is Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php
>
> Dr Robert A Fowkes wrote:
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>At 05:44 PM 6/2/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Front projection is the way to go if you have a room with full light
>>>control. Resolution is not everything and right now there are great
>>>bargains out there on 720P equipment. Based on that the cost of a
>>>projector and screen is equal to or less than what you would pay for a
>>>one piece display like the SXRD series.
>>
>>
>>An excellent point, Richard, and one reason that I'm not rushing out to
>>replace my 720p Runco CL-710 FP with an 1080p model right now even
>>though I also have a 1080p 58" HP in the room. 720p from a good
>>projector properly calibrated does a fine job for now especially with
>>the HD-DVD material out there still playing only 1080i. When 1080p
>>delivered sources become the norm rather than the exception then I'll
>>re-evaluate my position on this.
>>
>>
>>-- RAF
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>>same day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]