CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

[WanMan]

I am keying off of the follow reply posted in another thread:

[garyfritz]

My HT doesn't get enough use -- nor enough love from my wife, who is not a big movie fan -- to justify much investment. I happen to be feeding my 8" 8500 a 1080p signal, but only because it's easy to do with a PS3 and I prefer it over 1080i or 720p.

[BradTheAggie]

I use 1080i on my 8000, and am very happy with it. Can't justify spending more when I don't use it that much...

[ecrabb]

Same here, Gary... 1080p from a PS3 to my G70. Looks incredible. My wife actually loves movies, and we try to make it down to the HT at least once or twice a week... But, it'd be a tough sell to spend a LOT more money considering how great of an image I already have.

Wan, you sure make me think sometimes about what the hell you're really getting at!

Look, there are a whole slew of us with 8" machines that won't fully resolve 1080p. But, I suspect most of our choices have less to do with "poor financial conditions" and more to do with picking the projector that best fits our "bang for buck" desires and spending comfort level. Personally, I'm thrilled to have the machine I have for the money I spent on it. I could afford to sell my G70 and scrounge up a nice used G90, 9500, or 1209... But personally have little to no interest in dropping the extra $2000-3000+ to get a machine to best the picture I'm already watching in my HT.

As for your philosophical issue of not paying for pixel resolution in the source you can't see, that's simply a false choice. While it's true that you can't see ALL of the source resolution, you can see MOST of it. In seeing most of it, the difference between Blu-ray and the FAR inferior alternative (DVD) is so stark, plainly obvious, and in-your-face, that there's no point in discussing the issue further! Really, its that clearly different. So, there is not philosophical issue. We're not even considering the far superior audio experience Blu-ray has to offer, regardless of the projector you choose.

So, there are really only two alternatives to consider: Keep your 8" machine and enjoy something close to 90% of the spatial resolution with a smooth, film-like image, or spend another couple of grand on a 9" machine or a digital to view 100% of the spatial resolution Blu-ray has to offer, each choice with its advantage and disadvantages over your current machine. You consider your financial situation and decide what's best for you.

SC

[Kiev Savoie]

Well, for me that post was not motivated by finances. The G70's i have came my way at an outstanding price. this will be my first EM/LC machine and i stay active on this forum just trying to learn everything i can so i can get a better eye for video quality and appreciate the difference this upgrade will make. For me things have been happening almost too fast. i expected to play with my Barco 1208 for another 6 months to a year tweaking it till i ran out of things to try. Now that i have the G70's just sitting in storage though, I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that it's time to wrap up the 1208 and move on. Anyway the way prices are falling I don't see why anyone who really wants one can't get a decent deal on a 9" machine in the next year or two. I won't make that jump myself until i'm good and ready this time, i really want to see just what i can do with a top of the line 8" machine before moving on. it would seem like a waste not to.

[kal]

I'd have a 9" if I had room. They all require too much throw distance which places them all in the walk area of my second row of seats. The HD-215 lenses on my Zenith1200 are extremely short throw such that the projector's 100% over the first row and away from anyone bumping their heads.

Though I have toyed with the idea of trying to get a Cine 9 to fit. I just don't look forward to the 40+ hours of from the ground up setup time (since I'd redo the magnetics from scratch). For most content I doubt it'd even notice much of a difference from what I have now with what's essentially a Cine 8. Would give me the same accurate primary colours, same light output (12-13ft/L), same LC optics & contrast ratio, fairly similar high bandwidth video chain, etc. Slightly more resolving power yes, but unless you spend your days watching test patterns or an HTPC desktop you'd not notice it much.

Kal

[kal]

I'd have a 9" if I had room. They all require too much throw distance which places them all in the walk area of my second row of seats. The HD-215 lenses on my Zenith1200 are extremely short throw such that the projector's 100% over the first row and away from anyone bumping their heads.

Though I have toyed with the idea of trying to get a Cine 9 to fit. I just don't look forward to the 40+ hours of from the ground up setup time (since I'd redo the magnetics from scratch). For most content I doubt it'd even notice much of a difference from what I have now with what's essentially a Cine 8. Would give me the same accurate primary colours, same light output (12-13ft/L), same LC optics & contrast ratio, fairly similar high bandwidth video chain, etc. Slightly more resolving power yes, but unless you spend your days watching test patterns or an HTPC desktop you'd not notice it much.

Kal

[Kiev Savoie]

I'm really surprised to hear that Kal. I guess for your situation an 8" machine does make sense though.

[ecrabb]

Actually, an 8" machine makes sense for a lot more people's situations than you'd think. A lot of people in this forum have viewing distances and screen sizes that would make it difficult to even see the difference between an 8" and 9" machine, anyway! Unless you're sitting well inside 12' from an 8' wide screen (110" diag), you'll never see the additional sharpness the 9" provides. How many people here are inside 1.2x screen widths.

Kal, what's the typical difference in throw distance between our 8" machines and a 9" machine? I forgot all about that. I guess I won't be going to a 9" machine or digital anytime soon, either. My throw distance is probably too short for a 9" machine OR a digital... and I am NOT tearing apart my theater again anytime soon. I like watching movies too much.

SC

[bbfarmht]

[akajester]

I got a great price on a barco graphics 808 and have enjoyed building my room around that. We're a single income family with 3 kids, so a dedicated room didn't make much sense, it's more multipurpose. I'm still tweaking the barco and feel I'm at 90% of what the unit can offer. I run 720p from an htpc and xbox 360. I've done 1080i from the htpc and it looks a little sharper but I feel it makes a few flaws more noticeable. Hopefully once I get those ironed out I can stay at 1080i. Otherwise, I love the picture this thing puts out at 720p, part of me doesn't want to mess with it much more. My family loves it and anyone that stops by says it looks great. I wouldn't turn down a 9" set if it dropped in my lap, but I'm in no hurry!

[J Kildare]

From a guy who just jumped from an 8500 to 9500lc.

My 8500 had hd144 lenses, and MP mods with 400 hr tubes when I tore it down for the conversion.
Now it was extreme raster size to be sure, 1/16" from both sides. I could not adjust skew one click without hitting the edge. When I tore it down I was doing 1080p @ 72 thru a vp50 with scan lines thru the middle 2/3 of screen. The pic was incredible, with lots of 3d punch. I attribute a lot of this to the setup, screen and the fact that my walls are basically black material that eats up almost all reflections.

I have just spent a lot of time setting up the 9500lc with the same video chain. I did however add frankenyokes, and my raster is a lot more conservative, about 1/2" each side to allow for a slightly larger screen. The sharpness is about the same, partly because of the smaller raster and partly because of LC. I am now using g90 Hd10f lenses, so the corner focus is a little better. The pic is very close at first glance. I notice a slight difference in background detail, and a slight difference in 3d.

For most people the difference could be made up a lot easier with a VP and room treatment of some sort, providing you start with a really tight machine. For example, my ceiling is painted Benjiman Moore ultra flat black, and yet it has 10 times the reflections of the GOM fabric.

Nobody talks room treatment.......


Its Huge!!!!

In my gallery there is a pic of the darkest black carpet I could find along with black berklines, they are lit by 50w mr16 lamps. You can see the difference in reflections pretty quick...... and there goes the contrast.

Jim

[garyfritz]

[draganm]

[draganm]

[ecrabb]

[WanMan]

But the alternating black/white lines do an excellent job mimicking the the line-pairs that our eyes need to discern one piece of information from the next.

And SC, what I was getting at without just coming out and Crayola-ing it is that when it comes to projecting 1920x1080P the costs of entry to the user is higher in the analog world.

I think I need to assist one of the 9" folks to their grave and hawk their surviving spouse for an affordable buy.

[draganm]

[ecrabb]

[ecrabb]

[winduptoy]

In a perfect world I would go for a 9" machine, but it would be an expensive upgrade since a larger house would be required. Until that happens I'm quite happy with the G70.