|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Diddern"] | stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | km987654 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | km987654 wrote: | | I have been testing a Greg Eisemann HDMI Port 3 board and its just magic. I could tell you all day how good it is but you will produce technical details that show a digital is better. |
Who cares about digital..
Can you try post a few screen shots, showing the difference.?
Did the bandwidth get any better.? |
I could but what would be the point in this thread??Screen shots rarely show whats actually happening. What I can tell you is I can see a difference and my wife who honestly couldn't care less what was projecting the image had to say "wow how good is that" when we watched a movie last night (Sanctum). I am absolutely stocked with Gregs board its in another league compared to the external Moome box.[/quote
You are right in this mod from Greg it is much better.
Screenshots just give a indication nothing else.
But compared with same shutter on camera and time and same camera you see easy differences,
But still just a indication.
What I can't understand let digital be digital and CRT be CRT. There is no way in hell a CRT will be better, but maybe better to a person that like this so much.
If you like your CRT do not compare with a god digital. And with compare I mean side by side with a switch with both with the same picture or film. Everything else is just bull**** testing. |
Hey stop putting all CRT in the same box, your the one not knowing the dfifference from a 808AC and a 909LC, and they are still just Barco CRT projectors. with more or less the same bandwidth.
There is other options out there.. |
Fact is fact bull**** is bull**** ,,,,believe in your CRT I do t care.
And you do not know what I know.
Sorry your CRT is totally different form everyone else's and cine 9 and 909 reality is crap compared to yours. |
The problem is that you can not just trow the fact word around like you hold the universal truth..
There is more to it than you understand and like to understand.. And you have not seen all that a CRT can do, and i dint say it will beat your digital, but it will on some parameters, and in the end it comes down to preferences..
So your facts is your facts alone.. You cant push preferences on people..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Diddern"] | stridsvognen wrote: | | km987654 wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | km987654 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | km987654 wrote: | | I have been testing a Greg Eisemann HDMI Port 3 board and its just magic. I could tell you all day how good it is but you will produce technical details that show a digital is better. |
Who cares about digital..
Can you try post a few screen shots, showing the difference.?
Did the bandwidth get any better.? |
I could but what would be the point in this thread??Screen shots rarely show whats actually happening. What I can tell you is I can see a difference and my wife who honestly couldn't care less what was projecting the image had to say "wow how good is that" when we watched a movie last night (Sanctum). I am absolutely stocked with Gregs board its in another league compared to the external Moome box.[/quote
You are right in this mod from Greg it is much better.
Screenshots just give a indication nothing else.
But compared with same shutter on camera and time and same camera you see easy differences,
But still just a indication.
What I can't understand let digital be digital and CRT be CRT. There is no way in hell a CRT will be better, but maybe better to a person that like this so much.
If you like your CRT do not compare with a god digital. And with compare I mean side by side with a switch with both with the same picture or film. Everything else is just bull**** testing. |
Well there you have it CRT will be CRT and Digital will be Digital and they are different in almost every way the only real thing in common is that they both produce an image but which one you like better is unlikely to be answered with technical specifications as in the case of CRT at least the some of all the parts is a greater image than can be described in technical terms well at least it is for me. |
True... 
But not everybody have a eye to see the benefits of the analog image. |
There is NO benefits just what you think and do not know better. |
Well if you like to beat it up at the personal level shoot me a pm.!!!
You still need to understand that you compared a 8" mid level low bandwidth AC CRT those machines most of the users in here changed to a JVC digital machine, and ill say they were right to prefer the Digital.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hahaha!!! 
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hehe you started it stridsvognen hehe.
No hard feelings, fact is fact and I got to a point where I do not take crap and untrue statements anymore end of that story...
You see what you see when you watch movie and that counts more.
And I have tested Cine9, 909 reality against digital also so you are wrong. And so we can find out if 909 reality or marquee 9500lc ultra is better I have a deal to do this also. You know.
And you do not understand what is done to this 808.
And how you write things for me gets just stupid, and far for the reality. But no probe I send you a pm or call you the next time. I want people to get the facts not just fan of CRT statements.
And I get the picture for the 3,5Gh later today. So it can be compared. But still I have not seen it yet, and I know that last time I saw it the video card was broken and the picture you had form your Marquee was much better. Now its up and running with the newest simulator tubes 1080P certified 16/9 and all modifications to the tubes and up to the best there is today The only one in the world with this total mods. (What I've heard) Do you have 1080P certified 16/9 tubes or the old 4/3 original tubes?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | Hehe you started it stridsvognen hehe.
No hard feelings, fact is fact and I got to a point where I do not take crap and untrue statements anymore end of that story...
You see what you see when you watch movie and that counts more.
And I get the picture for the 3,5Gh later today. So it can be compared. But still I have not seen it yet, and I know that last time I saw it the video card was broken and the picture you had form your Marquee was much better. Now its up and running with the newest simulator tubes 1080P certified 16/9 and all modifications to the tubes and up to the best there is today The only one in the world with this total mods. (What I've heard) Do you have 1080P certified 16/9 tubes or the old 4/3 original tubes? |
You dont seem to understand that its not the tubes thats the limitation to the CRT.. Almost no matter if they are LCP or LUG..
But im sure a 16:9 masked tube is nice to have.
Most of the limitations is in the video chain. Get that solved befor you worry about tubes.
2nd.. you need to be able to run 1920x 1080P 72 hz, or you wont get the right motion and totaly smooth light output.
So get the bandwidth and the video chain setup to run 72hz, the new Radiance 4K models or XE+and XS+ will do it.
When thats in place you can say you have the video chain that will match a high end CRT.. Then just make the CRT handle the bandwidth.. 200Mhz or more. All the way from input to the tube face.
Check out the noise level with low level material, look into the tubes and see it looks clean.. maybe a 5-10% IRE pattern.
Get a perfect calibration, you can post the calibration file here, and make the gamma around 2,24 so you dont clip out low level.
Not before thats all done and perfect is there any ide in testing anything.. It will then once again be a waste of time.
All the perfect focus and magnetics are actualy less important than what i mentioned above..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | Hehe you started it stridsvognen hehe.
No hard feelings, fact is fact and I got to a point where I do not take crap and untrue statements anymore end of that story...
You see what you see when you watch movie and that counts more.
And I get the picture for the 3,5Gh later today. So it can be compared. But still I have not seen it yet, and I know that last time I saw it the video card was broken and the picture you had form your Marquee was much better. Now its up and running with the newest simulator tubes 1080P certified 16/9 and all modifications to the tubes and up to the best there is today The only one in the world with this total mods. (What I've heard) Do you have 1080P certified 16/9 tubes or the old 4/3 original tubes? |
You dont seem to understand that its not the tubes thats the limitation to the CRT.. Almost no matter if they are LCP or LUG..
But im sure a 16:9 masked tube is nice to have.
Most of the limitations is in the video chain. Get that solved befor you worry about tubes.
2nd.. you need to be able to run 1920x 1080P 72 hz, or you wont get the right motion and totaly smooth light output.
So get the bandwidth and the video chain setup to run 72hz, the new Radiance 4K models or XE+and XS+ will do it.
When thats in place you can say you have the video chain that will match a high end CRT.. Then just make the CRT handle the bandwidth.. 200Mhz or more. All the way from input to the tube face.
Check out the noise level with low level material, look into the tubes and see it looks clean.. maybe a 5-10% IRE pattern.
Get a perfect calibration, you can post the calibration file here, and make the gamma around 2,24 so you dont clip out low level.
Not before thats all done and perfect is there any ide in testing anything.. It will then once again be a waste of time.
All the perfect focus and magnetics are actualy less important than what i mentioned above.. |
We see soon mister, you are correct with things here. And have a lot to do with quality in a crt picture.
I will do this when I take the trip, but will look more how the picture is shown from reference movies and pictures.
Since that is what we look at.
But also with test patterns for shore. I hope to get this later today. And the trip as soon as I can.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | Hehe you started it stridsvognen hehe.
No hard feelings, fact is fact and I got to a point where I do not take crap and untrue statements anymore end of that story...
You see what you see when you watch movie and that counts more.
And I get the picture for the 3,5Gh later today. So it can be compared. But still I have not seen it yet, and I know that last time I saw it the video card was broken and the picture you had form your Marquee was much better. Now its up and running with the newest simulator tubes 1080P certified 16/9 and all modifications to the tubes and up to the best there is today The only one in the world with this total mods. (What I've heard) Do you have 1080P certified 16/9 tubes or the old 4/3 original tubes? |
You dont seem to understand that its not the tubes thats the limitation to the CRT.. Almost no matter if they are LCP or LUG..
But im sure a 16:9 masked tube is nice to have.
Most of the limitations is in the video chain. Get that solved befor you worry about tubes.
2nd.. you need to be able to run 1920x 1080P 72 hz, or you wont get the right motion and totaly smooth light output.
So get the bandwidth and the video chain setup to run 72hz, the new Radiance 4K models or XE+and XS+ will do it.
When thats in place you can say you have the video chain that will match a high end CRT.. Then just make the CRT handle the bandwidth.. 200Mhz or more. All the way from input to the tube face.
Check out the noise level with low level material, look into the tubes and see it looks clean.. maybe a 5-10% IRE pattern.
Get a perfect calibration, you can post the calibration file here, and make the gamma around 2,24 so you dont clip out low level.
Not before thats all done and perfect is there any ide in testing anything.. It will then once again be a waste of time.
All the perfect focus and magnetics are actualy less important than what i mentioned above.. |
We see soon mister, you are correct with things here. And have a lot to do with quality in a crt picture.
I will do this when I take the trip, but will look more how the picture is shown from reference movies and pictures.
Since that is what we look at.
But also with test patterns for shore. I hope to get this later today. And the trip as soon as I can. |
What worry most of us here is that you use these test as a reference to CRT, and to make that usefull you need to document the performance of the CRT, or its shortcommings.
So far no one ever have documented a decent bandwidth on a Barco, and i think most wonder why.. If i made a mod that did greatly improve bandwidth i would not hold myself back from showing it to the world.
Take pics of the video chain and CRT machine inside out please.. and tubes.. we like to see.
And please arrange that you have a VP that will do high bandwidth over 165Mhz, so you can run 72hz.
And check up on calibration.. measure the grayscale and colors for documentation.
If you dont do a decent job documenting those most basic stuff, we cant take your facts seriously.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | Hehe you started it stridsvognen hehe.
No hard feelings, fact is fact and I got to a point where I do not take crap and untrue statements anymore end of that story...
You see what you see when you watch movie and that counts more.
And I get the picture for the 3,5Gh later today. So it can be compared. But still I have not seen it yet, and I know that last time I saw it the video card was broken and the picture you had form your Marquee was much better. Now its up and running with the newest simulator tubes 1080P certified 16/9 and all modifications to the tubes and up to the best there is today The only one in the world with this total mods. (What I've heard) Do you have 1080P certified 16/9 tubes or the old 4/3 original tubes? |
You dont seem to understand that its not the tubes thats the limitation to the CRT.. Almost no matter if they are LCP or LUG..
But im sure a 16:9 masked tube is nice to have.
Most of the limitations is in the video chain. Get that solved befor you worry about tubes.
2nd.. you need to be able to run 1920x 1080P 72 hz, or you wont get the right motion and totaly smooth light output.
So get the bandwidth and the video chain setup to run 72hz, the new Radiance 4K models or XE+and XS+ will do it.
When thats in place you can say you have the video chain that will match a high end CRT.. Then just make the CRT handle the bandwidth.. 200Mhz or more. All the way from input to the tube face.
Check out the noise level with low level material, look into the tubes and see it looks clean.. maybe a 5-10% IRE pattern.
Get a perfect calibration, you can post the calibration file here, and make the gamma around 2,24 so you dont clip out low level.
Not before thats all done and perfect is there any ide in testing anything.. It will then once again be a waste of time.
All the perfect focus and magnetics are actualy less important than what i mentioned above.. |
We see soon mister, you are correct with things here. And have a lot to do with quality in a crt picture.
I will do this when I take the trip, but will look more how the picture is shown from reference movies and pictures.
Since that is what we look at.
But also with test patterns for shore. I hope to get this later today. And the trip as soon as I can. |
What worry most of us here is that you use these test as a reference to CRT, and to make that usefull you need to document the performance of the CRT, or its shortcommings.
So far no one ever have documented a decent bandwidth on a Barco, and i think most wonder why.. If i made a mod that did greatly improve bandwidth i would not hold myself back from showing it to the world.
Take pics of the video chain and CRT machine inside out please.. and tubes.. we like to see.
And please arrange that you have a VP that will do high bandwidth over 165Mhz, so you can run 72hz.
And check up on calibration.. measure the grayscale and colors for documentation.
If you dont do a decent job documenting those most basic stuff, we cant take your facts seriously. |
Ok MR Crt 😘
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm out. Obviously diddern, andreas and Norway is the center of video universe. I will make one final observation. I see you reference Stacey Spear's disc. I know Stacey and I am not sure he would agree with all of your observations.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | I'm out. Obviously diddern, andreas and Norway is the center of video universe. I will make one final observation. I see you reference Stacey Spear's disc. I know Stacey and I am not sure he would agree with all of your observations. |
Of course not, but I am sure he would agree with one thing: CRT is no longer the ultimate projector technology. 
We are just amateurs testing different projectors to find the best picture we can get for our budget, the only reason I partisipated in one CRT against Sony VW1000 is because some CRT fanboys in Norway bragged about this modifyed Barco and how it would beat the sh*t out of the Sony. And after months of this I said ok letīs see what you are talking about and brought my VW1000 to the guy who ownes the Barco. I have no interest in CRT projectors and to me they do not give a good picture, but I donīt care what kind of projector people have in their HT. But when people like Greg Eisemann claim to have the holy grail updates for a Barco 909 I can not let him get away with it because it is bull****!
And we all know that the center of all things is the USA. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | Spanky Ham wrote: | | I'm out. Obviously diddern, andreas and Norway is the center of video universe. I will make one final observation. I see you reference Stacey Spear's disc. I know Stacey and I am not sure he would agree with all of your observations. |
Of course not, but I am sure he would agree with one thing: CRT is no longer the ultimate projector technology.
We are just amateurs testing different projectors to find the best picture we can get for our budget, the only reason I partisipated in one CRT against Sony VW1000 is because some CRT fanboys in Norway bragged about this modifyed Barco and how it would beat the sh*t out of the Sony. And after months of this I said ok letīs see what you are talking about and brought my VW1000 to the guy who ownes the Barco. I have no interest in CRT projectors and to me they do not give a good picture, but I donīt care what kind of projector people have in their HT. But when people like Greg Eisemann claim to have the holy grail updates for a Barco 909 I can not let him get away with it because it is bull****!
And we all know that the center of all things is the USA. |
I dont think anyone here will ever claim CRT to be the ultimate projector, but it still do something better, and is prefered by some.
That some guys in Norway got confused and thinking they can make the Barco ultimate, dont have to fall down on every CRT ever made.
Its fair that you coment on the specifik CRT, but dont put that in your head, as the CRT standard.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | I'm out. Obviously diddern, andreas and Norway is the center of video universe. I will make one final observation. I see you reference Stacey Spear's disc. I know Stacey and I am not sure he would agree with all of your observations. |
Hehe I will say that me and Andreas are in this video universe and some here ink. yourselves are definitely not lol.
That disk were one example of many pattern that maybe someone find useful. I do not need to use it. My calibrator does everything I need to do and finished. 
And if Stacey says something else so what? Ask him is he a CRT fan or a realist hehe
This has noting to do with the center of video universe, what we know best, ,,just fact and that CRT is aging, but still very good and that is impressive. And that some here live with the belief that CRT is still the best and nothing is better, just believe  .
But all of the CRT guys here need to take the CRT hat off for a second and listen. Not that I say that its crap... But todays best home cinema projectors in digital are much better in total picture that they are in a total another league. I was like all of you some time ago when CRT was the best in my eyes, and many others. And the first time a saw a HD1 JVC and a Sony Rub. against a 808, 909 and marquees do not remember witch back then, there were NO WAY BACK for me.
And do not think that they and I did not know what they were doing.
Many won`t say this because they know that the CRT fan boys will never ever stop even if proven the opposite. I have done tests to show that it is like I say here on this forum, and every time it gets quit and they says when I live, yes that was much much better. And after 1 hour they call back and say now its the best again. hehe So yes I know what I talk about and I've had crt for MANY years and know what a HD picture look like in 2013. Side by side test shows everything.
If I see something that is better I will admit it with no problem. I do not have any hat on.... 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | brought my VW1000 to the guy who ownes the Barco. |
what source you running into your VW1000 during this contest, and at what resolution?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Normal 1080p BD via an Oppo DBP95 the same as fed to the Barco, the VW1000 upcales this with no visible artifacts as said in the link you posted some pages earlier in this tread.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | Normal 1080p BD via an Oppo DBP95 the same as fed to the Barco, the VW1000 upcales this with no visible artifacts as said in the link you posted some pages earlier in this tread. |
I'm very familiar with what happens when you put a lower resolution into a 4K projector. And though they say there are no artifacts, that's far from the truth. And you can contact Sony and they will explain to you that the internal "scaler" also does other things to diminish the artifacts, meaning there's a lot going on. or to put it different, the projector is also in the "cover up" mode.
here's the deal with digital technology... If your source is 1920X1080P (refresh does not matter here) the display device must also be 1920X1080P - in the event, there is not a direct pixel to pixel handshaking going on, the image is being compromised. And because you're not seeing anything or if the shortcomings of running compromised rates are not being displayed.. trust me they are there. To me they would jump off the screen, but for someone new to a native 4K display, they would instead have the oohs and ahhs.
So whenever a digital projector is not doing a pixel to pixel handshake, it will produce a compromised image. And that's an image that's not worthy to be used in a competition.
lets also look at it another way. based on the two projectors involved, both projected a compromised image. The Barco most likely was not able to properly resolved the 1920X1080P image, nor neither was the Sony, because neither of them were capable of fully/properly resolving the NATIVE image rate... but at the end of the day, the Sony was brighter and sharper, and you know what that means.......
So I hereby void that test all together...
As Greg would say; I hope this helps
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Mike its not nice of you slapping people in the face with FACTS. Shame on you..!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | Normal 1080p BD via an Oppo DBP95 the same as fed to the Barco, the VW1000 upcales this with no visible artifacts as said in the link you posted some pages earlier in this tread. |
I'm very familiar with what happens when you put a lower resolution into a 4K projector. And though they say there are no artifacts, that's far from the truth. And you can contact Sony and they will explain to you that the internal "scaler" also does other things to diminish the artifacts, meaning there's a lot going on. or to put it different, the projector is also in the "cover up" mode.
here's the deal with digital technology... If your source is 1920X1080P (refresh does not matter here) the display device must also be 1920X1080P - in the event, there is not a direct pixel to pixel handshaking going on, the image is being compromised. And because you're not seeing anything or if the shortcomings of running compromised rates are not being displayed.. trust me they are there. To me they would jump off the screen, but for someone new to a native 4K display, they would instead have the oohs and ahhs.
So whenever a digital projector is not doing a pixel to pixel handshake, it will produce a compromised image. And that's an image that's not worthy to be used in a competition.
lets also look at it another way. based on the two projectors involved, both projected a compromised image. The Barco most likely was not able to properly resolved the 1920X1080P image, nor neither was the Sony, because neither of them were capable of fully/properly resolving the NATIVE image rate... but at the end of the day, the Sony was brighter and sharper, and you know what that means.......
So I hereby void that test all together...
As Greg would say; I hope this helps |
You have clearly not seen the Sony VW1000! And I am not new to a 4K display and I have tested the VW1000 with alot of native 4K and 1080 and the 1080 upscaled is very very good, but of course not as good as native 4K. And if the artifact would just jump of the screen to you you are the only one I have heard of so far with the VW1000, but you have not seen it and therefor you have no clue. I know about pixel to pixel handshaking and so on, but the problems is very vell hidden with the VW1000 and it is visible artifact free with BD movies, but if you put up testpatterns this is not the case and you will se alot of artifacts.
And the Sony is not just brighter and sharper it is better in every aspect of the picture!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Mike its not nice of you slapping people in the face with FACTS. Shame on you..!! |
And what facts was he slapping??
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Mike its not nice of you slapping people in the face with FACTS. Shame on you..!! |
And what facts was he slapping?? |
I'm glad you asked...
in the shot I have two boards out of a Barco commercial digital projector. I'm using two boards to show both sides. the board in the picture is called an "Image Processor Board"
As such, it's job is to process the image in the digital format. A very small part of the board accepts RGBHV and also S-video and composite. Another section of that same board converts that analog video to digital. The main section of the board (about 85%) is used to process (MAP/ Interpolate) signals that are different from the pixel resolution of the display device.
Also meaning that if you run a native source into that board, you would not be using 85% of it.
The same happens when processing for 4K, but there's one other than going on other than mapping and interpolating, that is cover up. they call it something else, but I thought I would give you a more understandable meaning.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No facts about the Sony?
Can you give me any facts about the Sony VW1000 upscaling algorythms?
And what would these artifacts look like since they would just stick out to you.
And have you seen the Sony VPL-VW1000ES?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
