Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
21 - 23 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
No idea how many lumens my under $1K 3200 lumen projector actually outputs. The measured output is completely irrelevant as I can watch it in daylight and it works great, and at night I dial it way down and it looks even better.

I love the idea behind calibration and color accuracy, but I am talking strictly about the experience in our house, and comparison to friends, neighbors, etc. I doubt I know anyone with a display of any kind that costs over $10K, let alone anyone who would hire someone to calibrate their display for them. In my experience, the color, depth, brightness of my cheap projector match the quality of most LED displays and certainly hit a quality level where guests are always impressed. I did a fair amount of work tweaking the settings to get them dialed in, but only using my own eyes. The black levels are obviously not as good, but once you start watching they are definitely good enough that you do not notice at all. The best part for me, though, is that the projected image is far more pleasant to watch. There is something fatiguing about watching a light source beaming straight at you, vs watching a projected image. I don't see myself ever switching over. That, and there is probably no way to bring an 85" display down the stairs into my current theater room, let alone 150", which is the size I really want. Maybe when they improve the tile TVs, they'll find a way to make them less fatiguing as well, but it will likely never be affordable, let along fit in a little box UPS will conveniently ship. I've been using projectors for over 20 years now, and have converted a number of people to do the same. I don't know anyone who has switched back to panel displays for their primary movie room.

Time to get back to my baseball game, the players and strike zone are life size, this is great.
A $1,000 projector rated at 3200 lumens likely has 1000 ACTUAL lumens--unless it is a "business" projector designed for PowerPoint presentations... those can be quite bright, and incredibly inaccurate for cinema or TV. "I can watch it in daytime"-- you can watch ANY visible image in daylight. But it's not going to look half decent. If all you need is what you have now and nothing better, why post here at all?

There is NOTHING superior about projected video images. Nothing at all. To the point that movie theaters are even going to stop using projectors because they cannot achieve images as incredible as TVs consumers can purchase and use at home for $1000. Projection will be DEAD in 10 years. And rightfully so. The $1,000 projector has **** for a lens and few pixels compared to an average TV. The lens in a $1k projector will degrade the image so much it looks out of focus compared to a $1k Hisense TV. TVs have no lens to degrade the images. A lens in a $10,000 projector even degrades images compared to direct-view displays. In a $1K projector, the lens budget is a fraction of the lens budget in a $10K projector. So the $1K projector degrades images even more. Some of the lens errors creep-in as red, green, and blue not focusing sharply at the same distance. This causes not being able to find "perfect" focus because the focus never optimizes. 1 or more colors are always somewhat out of focus. Without a lens, direct view TVs have ever pixel perfectly sharp, corner to corner. Projectors have about half the light in the corners of the screen compared to the center of the screen so you can't even get projectors to illuminate the screen uniformly. A $50,000 projector I measured had 25% less light in the corners than in the center of the screen. A $3000 projector I measured was almost 50% dimmer in the corners than in the center. I don't even want to know how bad a $1K projector can be. I was asked to evaluate a $900 projector from a major manufacturer and I found it to produce ugly images that would satisfy nobody who knew what they were looking at. Bad black levels, uneven illumination, no auto-iris to improve contrast ratio, bad motion quality, unable to deliver immersive images, no headroom for white (for specular highlights) and only 1/2 as much light as it SHOULD have and when it is time to replace the lamp, it will be delivering only 1/4 the amount of light you need to make decent images. If none of that bothers you... proceed with your plans, they can't miss these targets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
....why post here at all?
Because I disagreed with nearly every opinion you stated in your first post. It is extremely easy to provide a satisfying image at 133".

You make a lot of good points, a projector will not technically measure as well as a typical flat panel, high quality lenses can provide much better images than the plastic lenses in a $1000 projector (my last projector had a lovely glass lens, and was a joy to setup), I agree that an iris is necessary on most projectors but that feature is now widely available. And your viewing distances are great suggestions.

I firmly believe that a projected 133" image is far more satisfying than a large flat panel. 4000 lumens might be nice, but is definitely not a requirement. You clearly don't like projectors, and have some decent reasons why they don't work for you. But in my opinion, they still provide a much better experience for the in home cinema. I regularly have friends who own shiny new OLED screens comment on how much better the experience is with my projector. You might not be able to take a measurement to prove why with anything except a ruler, but so many people prefer it hands down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
Because I disagreed with nearly every opinion you stated in your first post. It is extremely easy to provide a satisfying image at 133".

You make a lot of good points, a projector will not technically measure as well as a typical flat panel, high quality lenses can provide much better images than the plastic lenses in a $1000 projector (my last projector had a lovely glass lens, and was a joy to setup), I agree that an iris is necessary on most projectors but that feature is now widely available. And your viewing distances are great suggestions.

I firmly believe that a projected 133" image is far more satisfying than a large flat panel. 4000 lumens might be nice, but is definitely not a requirement. You clearly don't like projectors, and have some decent reasons why they don't work for you. But in my opinion, they still provide a much better experience for the in home cinema. I regularly have friends who own shiny new OLED screens comment on how much better the experience is with my projector. You might not be able to take a measurement to prove why with anything except a ruler, but so many people prefer it hands down.
I clearly don't like projectors because I have eyes. I am an imaging systems engineer. I've worked on the scanning equipment used in the first digital restoration of Snow White back in the DVD days. I've worked on analog cinema projects, digital cinema projects, 3D projects for medical, petroleum, military, mapping, and clandestine ops. I've used and evaluated projectors selling for $800 to $60,000+. I know what projectors can and can't do at every price point. I am also HIGHLY aware that people claiming to LOVE PROJECTORS MORE than technically superior in every way except maximum physical size, are often using projector screens I would throw away because they are so bad. I have 2 premium projections screens... one with woven fabric that's acoustically transparent. It's 10 feet wide and has motorized "curtains" to block unused parts of the screen with black velvet. The other screen is Stewart Filmscreen's legendary StudioTek 100 reference-grade projection screen. It is a special version of that screen mounted to a hard board to stop the subwoofers from shaking the screen during the crazier bass heavy movie scenes. I have also done professional calibration for about 10 years and have seen EVERYTHING in home theater systems. Lesser-quality screens than the ones I use are s*** when you see them side by side with the best screens. I can make a $25,000 laser phosphor projector look like it might cost $5000 just by using it with a lesser projection screen. A lot of people who are on $1000 projectors use paint for their screen to keep costs down. OK, whatever, but I have also compared chalk-white latex paint (pure flat white) and 2 different types of "screen paint" that are considerably more expensive than latex paint, but much cheaper than commercial screens. It was a horror show for an image scientist. You cannot appreciate how much screen manufacturers can accomplish with engineered screen materials until you can compare them to paint and other inexpensive screen options.

The best lenses I've used have been computer designed lenses with all glass elements, 16 elements most of the time, but occasionally 17 elements. There are 32 or 34 lens surfaces that the light has to pass through before getting to the screen. Each lens surface causes a slight "ding" on image quality. The glass itself is generally pretty good, but even when the lenses touch each other, you cannot eliminate any of those lens surfaces from causing a loss of image quality. If you put a lens from a perfectly good $1000 projector on, say a $25,000 laser-phosphor projector, you would be HORRIFIED if you could see the 2 images side by side. With a TV, there are no "optics" between the pixels and you... there's a "safety" layer, at least one layer of anti-glare coating, and if it is an LCD/LED TV, there's a polarizing layer for each pixel color. None of these disturb the light significantly after it is emitted by the TV. Flat screen TVs have nearly nothing between you and the light from the pixels and every pixel is uniformly illuminated. The center of a TV isn't twice as bright as the corners as with many projectors.

The problem with people who love projection (often) is that all they care about is big physical size of images without any reasoning behind it. If you have a 50-degree viewing angle on a big screen, you get precisely the SAME visual impact from a 65-inch diagonal TV if you sit close enough to the 65-inch TV to produce a 50 degree viewing angle. I've seen theaters in homes that have a $1500 projector, a 14-foot wide screen, and a pair of $300/pair small bookshelf speakers for sound. WTF? How is that "good" in any way? A $1700 85-inch Hisense TV will blow the projector setup out of the water if you setup with the same viewing angle and the TV will eliminate the noise of the projector in the room, eliminate the damage that even the 16 or 17 element computer-designed projection lens. The TV will show you every pixel in the image. The projector will show you HALF of the pixels in the original images (because a $1000 projector will not have 3840x2160 resolution imagers)--but only if the projector has image shift. And even though the projector shows HALF of the pixels in UHD images, each pixel is 4 times larger than it should be. You can barely reproduce anything that looks like hair on a $1000 projector, but on the best 85 inch Hisense TV currently selling for about $1500 (you don't need a long cable or a screen with the TV so you can spend a little more), you'll be able to count the hairs if you wish. And the range of colors the projector can reproduce is LAME compared to the 85 inch Hisense TV. You see almost NONE of the expanded color space of UHD from inexpensive projectors while the TV will show you all kinds of colors you've never seen in video before.
 
21 - 23 of 23 Posts
Top