How Good can a Front projector be (1 Viewer)

[Guy Kuo]

Size matters. In this case, smaller size matters a lot. The rainbow, limited panel resolution and dithering aspects of DLP are magnified when one attempts to throw an image larger than the technology's sweet spot. In the case of rainbow artifacts, a smaller angle of view means that your eyes sweep a smaller angle while moving from one gaze point to another. That smaller angle means that rainbows are smaller and less noticeable. Panel resolution limits how closely you can sit to the screen. You need to be far away enough that your vision no longer sees the interpixel separation as visible noise. A very slight defocus in the underfocus direction (farther than the screen) helps hidge this problem, but appropriate viewing distance (about 2 x width for a 1024 pixel wide display or 1.6 x width for an HD2+) is very crucial to attaining a smooth image. Dithering is also much more effective if one is far enough away to allow the individual pixels to blend together. Size matters. The propensity is to ignore the limitations and simply shoot for an arbitrary screen size and seating distance, but you won't achieve a projector's maximal clarity and realism without paying attention to these basics. Digital projection doesn't have the same strengths and weaknesses as CRT projection. Setup needs to take that into account.

 

[Michael Pineo]

I will

I think any blanket statement like this can be pretty much ignored. I assume to even make a statement like that, one would need to have seen every single projector that sells for under $5000. Also, crap is a very subjective term. What exactly does that mean? Does it mean not as good as a well set up CRT projector? Unimpressive black levels? If you push really hard you can get one to come out of your ass? It could mean so many things.

Hopefully you can take a look at some and make up your own mind. Unfortunately, that can be hard to do, since not many stores carry them, and if they do, most won't have them setup properly.

It's possible that a sub $5000 digital projector won't have the picture you are looking for, but you will be doing yourself a disservice to not look for yourself if you can. I'm glad I did. I am very happy with my Panny L300U. Is it the best projector in the world? Of course not. But it does display a very good image that I am very happy with. My entire family likes it so much that they generally come over every weekend for movie night, and anyone who has seen HDTV on it has commented that it is like looking through a window.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents Good luck!

Mike "Enjoying the crap out of my projector" Pineo

 

[Chester II]

Damn dudes,

Is Chris Theg just trying to piss everybody off? My Plus Piano He-3200 which is still available for $1999 is a low resolution projector that downconverts high definition yet still gives me 90% of that WOW factor. I mean....damn...psuedo hi-def looks great with progressive scanned dvds looking almost (but not quite) as good. Does my projector have limits....duh..yeah......My screen maxes out at 6.5 feet wide and I wish it were a little brighter. Does that prevent me from having a damn good time....HELL NO ! !

Dang dudes,

Chester

 

[Bob Maged]

When I see a statement on this forum as incredibly wrong as what ChrisTheg said, the first thing I do is click on the forum member's search button, to see what other pearls of misinformation he has been spreading. The other day, in this thread he made the same $6000 remark, and claimed that only a professional could set up a front projection system. And then in this thread he tried to assert that InFocus projectors are not worthy of home theater applications. The guy claims to be a HT specialist (God help anyone foolish enough to hire him as a consultant) but hasn't got a clue. There are over 118,000 posts in the

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Absolutely Guy, I totally agree. However, if in minimizing those weaknesses to the point where the picture with it's distinct set of trade-offs is significantly smaller to roughly equal another projector regardless of type, I would consider that an inferior display. The same thing applies with say, video-only grade CRTs, where a smaller size would be more appropriate compared to a much higher-grade unit. Shooting an arbitrary size is the wrong thing to do, but I think calling a picture equal also should take into account the size you can throw while still maintaining a quality image.

If you blow up an image to a larger size and it no longer is comparable or as realistic, then overall I'd have to say the image is not as high-quality, regardless of the reasons as to why the larger image is weaker. Could be lack of light output, pixels, scan line visibility, worse rainbows, dithering, etc etc.

To compare, the image size should be roughly equivalent. The "ideal" size for maximizing a display model should be taken into account as a positive or negative tradeoff. And again, this is a very subjective thing, since you can by pure lumens go much larger with many digital projectors, but I think you'd agree also that the light output ability to go larger is certainly NOT always better, as evidenced by your much smaller picture on your HT1000.

Certainly you can throw very good pictures with the HT1000 and also an HD2+ projector, but at what sizes? To maintain or improve on that ht1000 PQ and be able to shoot a MUCH larger size with an HD2+ unit, to call these "equal" is a little misleading, since maintaining quality with larger size is certainly a significant aspect of the PQ.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

I don't think ChrisTheg's statements were all that inaccurate after reading them in the other threads. He seems to approach the issue as a HT designer for higher-end systems. Approaching things from an extremely (probably over-critical) perspective, certainly the low end projectors of ANY technology are rife with weaknesses in comparison.

This does NOT mean that most people wouldn't be totally pleased with them. Most people don't have extreme PQ as a priority, and in reality, I am not actually that picky when it comes to video, but it certainly is helpful to be picky when trying to judge the quality of a display or maximize its performance. NOTHING out there is perfect, and don't let anyone tell you that the picture from some snazzy high-end projector is perfect. It's not.

And I agree, a professional can definitely help in properly setting up ANY display system. You don't *NEED* one, just as you don't *NEED* a high-end display and can be totally happy with a lower cost unit. But to say that there are no benefits with higher-quality displays, or properly calibrated displays is as equally misleading as making the blanket statement that all digitals under X amount of money suck. Which is why I attempted to clarify my position and perspective here.

For me, they have enough weaknesses in terms of PQ for the price that I chose another route.

 

[Bob Maged]

ChrisWiggles:

I was not saying that there are no benefits from a higher quality display. There is no disputing the fact that you can spend a lot of money and get a tangible improvement in your HT. What I was saying was that there are plenty of very satisfied HT owners, myself included, who spent considerably less money than the so-called expert claimed is necessary. And we actually set up our FP systems by ourselves, without needing an HT installation professional. Whoopee.

 

[JawhnM]

It's all a matter of perspective. It's what your used to, what you've seen and what you expect. Can you be happy with a LOW QUALITY item? Of course you can! THINK BOSE! They are still considered by MOST people to be HIGH END equipment. A large following is NOT a sign of quality.

Satisfying FP can be achived at a relitively low cost. But as you knoledge and expectations increase so will your budget. I still think a used CRT FP is still the best "Bang For The Buck", but ultimatly the final decision is up to you.

 

[sam_canavo]

I hope you can continue on as this is informative and
a very interesting thread.

Chris W

I won't tell you what kind of FP I have- LOL

Sorry I am sorta new to this so not much to add.

 

[JeromeB]

Gentlemen,

Outstanding thread. But as a neophyte I am wondering, if I go with a decent projector (e.g. BenQ PE8710) with a projection size of about 100” and the appropriate viewing distance, will a poor video data set such as VHS look like mud? I understand that a high resolution system is going to be hamstrung by the data quality you are trying to project, and thus if I want to view old VHS movies and DVD am I wasting my time with FP?

Cheers,
-JeromeB

 

[Guy Kuo]

DVD will look great on a FP system. Old VHS will tend to look blurry on anything over 42 inches diagonal. The resolution just isn't there on VHS. DVD is much more detailed and cleaner a signal than VHS tape.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

VHS, OTA may look pretty bad on anything big as guy says, but while DVD can look not as good as HD that big, certainly it is WELL worth it to go FP if you can, IMO, if you're into movies.

 

[JeromeB]

Thank you for the advice regarding FP. Given that DVD represents an excellent format for FP, would you recommend a DVD player with direct digital output (DVI) such as the Samsung DVD-HD931 or Pioneer DV59-AVi with HDMI connectivity? Does keeping your video signal in the digital domain worth the expense, i.e. is this a visually detectable difference?

Regards,
-jb

 

[Chester II]

Jerome dude,

The general consensus is that keeping the signal all digital results in a visually cleaner images with less or NO artifacts that are sometimes seen through component or GOD FORBID, s-video. It gives the image a nice little PUNCH that makes it worth it given that some of these DVI capable DVD players are so cheap. Having said that you have the option of using a personal computer with DVI outputs and a good DVD player such as PowerDVD or Theatertek to maintain an all-digital signal. I have this very setup and yeah the picture looks crisper with somewhat better contrast but it isn't a huge difference over my Denon 1600's component outputs so I've decided to leave my p.c. in my office and wait a year or so before I build a dedicated home theater p.c. (htpc). Don't forget that the brand of projector will also influence how much of a noticeable improvement you will see regarding component vs. DVI. So many variables.....

Dude,

Chester

 

[cabreau]

I'll disagree also.

I believe that - as with anything else in the home theater enthusiast's world - you will find that there comes a point where your money doesn't get you as far as it did when you were looking at beginner-midrange systems. The difference between a $500 and $1000 set of speakers is huge compared to the difference between a $1000 and $2000 set of speakers. My point - doubling how much you spend doesn't get you as far. There are PLENTY of sub $5000 digital projectors that will blow most of us away and perform so good that 90% of viewers wouldn't even be able to see a difference. Unless you are a hardcore, professional videophile, most of you would find MANY sub $5k machines to be quite sufficient.

For instance - I've viewed/bought the Infocus X1, Dell 3200MP LCD projector, the Optoma EP 750, an Eiki LC-SM4, an Eiki LC-XM4, and had an old NView Diamond 450 given to me. By far, the Infocus X1, at $999 (and the cheapest, BTW), blew all of the others away as far as Picture Quality was concerned. Sure, I see rainbows and will be returning it because of that, but it has a 2x color wheel. For $1299, you can get an Optoma H30 with a 4x wheel or $1599 for the PB200 (XGA) with a 3x wheel that will greatly reduce the amount of rainbows. That is more than enough for most people who don't have $20k to go blow on HT.

So, for most of us regular movie enthusiasts who aren't true professionals. If you watch 4-5 movies a week and some TV on it, you will easily find a sub $5k projector to do EVERYTHING you want and more.

The best place to look and read reviews is:

www.projectorcentral.com
and
www.avsforum.com

Those are both excellent resources.

 

[Chester II]

Dudes,

Cabreau is totally right dudes....

Dudes,

Chester

 

[JeromeB]

Thanks for the excellent advice.

Question: In trying to optimize picture quality, any thoughts on which projector type is better: DLP vs. LCD. Is a three chip LCD better than a single chip (HD2+) DLP? Since there is a color wheel with the DLP, is this projector more likely to cause headaches related to color shift/rainbow effect?

Thanks for the help.
-jb

 

[Matthew Will]

I am a strong advocate for bang for the buck. I'm only 19 and still in college so money doesn't come easy for me. This past summer I purchased a Dell 3200MP. It was good when I bought it. Then for christmas I got the Bravo D1 DVD player with DVI out. It made a considerable difference to picture quality. I project onto a flat white wall and I impress people all the time. Better yet, no one complains about rainbows and neither do I. I see them because I know how to see them but they don't want me to return the projector. Maybe I'll look into a CRT when I get my own home and I can dedicate a room for HT. Or perhaps if I can save enough money for a higher quality DLP with a faster wheel or just a really high resolution LCD. Right now the 3200mp with D1 player is working awesome. Since I'm only home for 3-4 months out of the year I rarely log any time on the machine. I've had it for about 6-7 months now and I probably have less than 50 hours on it. If anyone says that front projection systems that cost less than 5 grand blow then they should come by my place. I don't even have surround sound yet. All I have are two homemade Adire Audio HE10.1 monitor speakers. I can't wait till next summer when I build a Tempest sub and 5-6 more monitors. It will be rediculous I kid you not. Matt

 

[Ralph B]

I have both a sony 36: XBR800 HDTV and a XGA FP. get both!!!