Slashdot Mirror

Some have suggested monitors, but if size is an issue and you having the lighting conditions for it, may I suggest a projector? Head over to Projector Central to check out what may work for you. With 30k hour lamp life, I like the LG PF1000U or PF1500.

You could also drop Robert Heron a line and ask him. He's probably forgotten more about TVs than most of us could ever hope to know.

Some have suggested monitors, but if size is an issue and you having the lighting conditions for it, may I suggest a projector? Head over to Projector Central to check out what may work for you. With 30k hour lamp life, I like the LG PF1000U or PF1500.

You could also drop Robert Heron a line and ask him. He's probably forgotten more about TVs than most of us could ever hope to know.

Some have suggested monitors, but if size is an issue and you having the lighting conditions for it, may I suggest a projector? Head over to Projector Central to check out what may work for you. With 30k hour lamp life, I like the LG PF1000U or PF1500.

You could also drop Robert Heron a line and ask him. He's probably forgotten more about TVs than most of us could ever hope to know.

I always thought it's odd that monitors are wider than they are tall. Isn't it far more convenient to use them, well, like we used to use paper?

If all we did was read papers on our monitors then maybe portrait (you really can get them) monitors would be the norm however a monitor can be used to display lots of different things so it is more practical to display on a landscape monitor. In fact any monitor that has an aspect ratio of greater than one is in effect a landscape monitor.

As for why most HDTV's and modern monitors have an aspect ratio of 16:9 that is a compromise between the many competing aspect ratios that are currently available. For a better understanding read this and there are many other sites that discuss this as well.

Well, he probably wasn't aware exactly which model of monitor you had. Generalizations tend to be bad for this reason.

I, for example, have an LCD projector with a dynamic iris. It dims the bulb for dark scenes, and it is only for the improvement in contrast ratios. I know this, because it doesn't dim the bulb by decreasing the voltage over the filament, but by closing shutters (the iris) between the bulb and the LCD panel. It's described in more detail here

I don't know the full history of the feature on monitors, but I'd assume it was originally to increase contrast ratio. After one marketer slapped a "energy efficient" sticker on the box, the manufacturers realized the marketing benefit of the feature, and probably renamed the menu for later models.

This isn't true, from here:
"The primary advantage of this format is a low manufacturing cost. Since HD-DVD media is so technically similar to standard DVD media (it uses the same layer thicknesses as DVD, made of similar materials), the discs can be produced with only a slight modification to existing manufacturing lines. "
"This technology comes with a significant price. Manufacturing Blu-Ray discs requires significant costs in updating DVD fabrication equipment, and would be a sharp manufacturer cost increase over HD-DVD."

Toshiba also got the jump on sony and released it's first players months earlier allowing it to get production ramped up. It's true that when HD-DVD started to lose they chopped at the price, but it was already significantly lower than Bluray.

So that he can avoid having to lug around the laptop also?
Besides, how about a 1.8Kg projector to use with a wifi enabled smartphone. Not the nicest looking thing in the world but it does the job (supposidly): Taxan PS 125X Wifi card enabled.

1. For speakers go to Ascend Acoustics. The 170's are great, if you have a small room, go ahead and get the even smaller ones. Buy them w/the mounting bracket and aim 'em all towards the center of the "sweet spot" you want in your room. $1200 w/shipping and brackets.
2. Buy a decent subwoofer. Get a Canton, for example. Get it as inexpensive as you can find online. Probably get one smaller than you think you'll need, since everyone overestimate's how big of a sub they need, especially if you have full size other speakers, like the Ascend 170s. $250-350
3. For wires, go to Monoprice for anything specialty (hdmi, etc...) and Home Depot for a big spool of large gauge speaker wire. Everything wire could possibly need for a HT shouldn't run more than $100-200 total. Use good shielded coax for your sub. Every other speaker is perfect with Home Depot copper.
4. Get a Denon 38XX receiver. A really good receiver is key. Do some research on which models do what to fit your specific needs, but get something decent in the $900-1200 range at least to get the most use out of your speakers. Denon won't steer you wrong. There are other brands that are comparable, but don't cost any less when they're truely comparable and usually have at least one receiver class that isn't worth the money.
5. Get the latest best deal HT projector by going to Projector Central and reading the latest set of reviews in your price range. Then shop online for the best deal. It changes too fast for a recommendation to be really useful, but you can get a Sanyo PLV-Z2000 1080p projector for $2200 right now. Get a ceiling mount kit for it if that fits your room.
6. Get a stewart filmscreen to fit your room. Remember, you want your head to be sitting about 1.3-1.8 time the screen width away from the screen. The variance is for if you prefer to sit in the front, middle, or back in big screen movie theaters. Your screen will last much longer than your electronics, so don't be afraid to get a nice one. If you have a totally light controlled room, get a white screen. If you don't, get a grey screen. Either way, get the model with the thick black velvet border, it's way worth it. $800-1800, depending on size and style.
7. Get an upscaling HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray player. Shop online for the best deal of the moment, or buy a PS3 if you want Blu-Ray. $400-750
8. Unless you absolutely must have the NFL sunday ticket, order Dishnetwork and get their current VIP-series HD DVR. Right now that's a 722, although a 622 is almost identical. Get the DishDVR package w/HD. Watch HD in pleasure. $90/month.
9. If you don't live alone, get a HT-specific uhf universal remote and program it to control everything else. Check Remote Central for the latest recommendations and deals. $100-600.
10. Use pot lights for the ceiling and rope lights from Home Depot for steps/theater aisle floors. Hook all lights up through remote controllable dimmers. Crown molding a bit down the wall w/rope lights in it also works well. Price Varies depending on taste.
11. If you might have power issues, get a $100-200 UPS online and plug your expensive stuff in through it.
12. Don't use a square room. Do look at the acoustic issues and consider soundproofing and deadening the walls and ceiling. (Carpet usually takes care of the floor).
13. For the best experience, no windows and black walls and ceiling. Put the door where if it opens, it doesn't shine light directly on the screen.
14. Ideally arrange the projector and screen so that the light go

The article has alot of breadth, but is a bit misleading due to its lack of depth. For example, they gloss over the different projector technologies. They really don't say much about DLP rainbow artifacts, or that DLP suffers from poor color accuracy. DLP does offer high contrast, but at the expense of brightness. They don't mention the recent generation (starting from ~2 years ago) of LCD front projectors that virtually eliminate screen door effects. I'd wager that a $1500 Panasonic AE1000 would give that Sorny $3000 LCOS a run for its money and maybe outperform it in some areas. Projector Central has really comprehensive reviews: http://www.projectorcentral.com/sony_vw50.htm I will grant them that for a "reference" theater, $3k is not too unreasonable to spend on the display. Just more than I would like to :) Regarding speakers, that's a very subjective topic. Even taking a CD to a store and listening to their speakers doesn't give an entirely accurate represetnation of how they'll perform in *your* home. Rooms and settings are different, receivers/amps are different. Plus, the biggest thing with quality speakers that few people mention is that it takes time for the speakers to settle in. It sounds strange (pun intended), but it's true. When I first bought my Polk RT-55's, they sounded good and I was happy enough with them. After a year I noticed that they sounded richer and fuller. It's difficult to describe, but it was a substantial enough improvement that I noticed it, and that's saying something. Overall it's a good read, but take their info with a grain of salt.

MSRPs on all 1080i/p projectors available on the market. The Panny AE1000 does 1080p/60 will be MSRP ~$3K. That will be the floor for 1080p projectors this year.

Perhaps you're thinking about PJs that take 1080p *input*. I'm talking about those that *display* 1080p/60.

Even Better. $2500 (720P) - $7500 (1080P)

Front projection technology has made *amazing* progress over the years. Just imagine giant screen plasmas. They are that good. And you can have the screen almost as big as you want without having to deal with a heavy ass tv.

107" Dalite Hi Power screen can be had for about $500.

720 Front Projector Panasonic $2000 (I've got this one)
http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ax100.ht m

OR

1080 Front Projector JVC DLA $7000
http://projectorcentral.com/jvc_dla-rs1.htm

Even Better. $2500 (720P) - $7500 (1080P)

Front projection technology has made *amazing* progress over the years. Just imagine giant screen plasmas. They are that good. And you can have the screen almost as big as you want without having to deal with a heavy ass tv.

107" Dalite Hi Power screen can be had for about $500.

720 Front Projector Panasonic $2000 (I've got this one)
http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ax100.ht m

OR

1080 Front Projector JVC DLA $7000
http://projectorcentral.com/jvc_dla-rs1.htm

Bullshit.

According to Projector Central, the Infocus 5000 takes 1080i over component input. Older Infocus units were 480p projectors. So, your complaint there is also utter bullshit. Why should a 480p projector take 1080i as input?

Your complaint has nothing to do with the PS3 or Blu-Ray. Every HDTV I've seen, even 720p native panels, takes a 1080i signal as input (though it may scale the signal down for display purposes). Your claim that the PS3 can't output 720p BD movies, and therefore must downgrade to 480p is just completely wrong.

I own a 360, a PS3, and a Sony HS-20 720p digital projector (also a dd5.1 sound system). I can attest that this setup works in its entirety (digital and analog HD video and dd5.1 digital audio over fiber).

You forgot Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS). JVC, under the DILA trademark, and Sony produce LCoS projectors. LCoS doesn't suffer from either the rainbow effect of the screen door effect. Please see LCoS Overview.

Price Japan will export just about anything Japanese to anyone in the world. Some years ago I bought a Sony HS-20 video projector from that site, because it wasn't available in the US at the time. It still works just great. But perhaps court judgments like this will ultimately kill companies like Price Japan.

So, does this mean that Sony can legally prevent private international re-sale of their product line too? Where is the demark line between what is and what is not permissible?

When will you people understand that mere technology cannot win that kind of war. Who is compatible with who, who's got the best quality, who's got the more titles, etc... All these questions, ALL OF THEM, are irrelevant when it comes to who will win the battle (and the war).

The war will be won by the format that is on the front display of all Best Buy-like stores over the planet. Read here for more infos: http://projectorcentral.com/retailing_HD-DVD_Blu-r ay.htm

Well, of course you might be right, but you're one person on Slashdot claiming that numerous articles on well-established home-theatre sites out there are wrong.

Here's another:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/retailing_HD-DVD_B lu-ray.htm

"Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray have all of the progressively scanned 1080-lines per frame of information on the disc, and this information is not lost or compromised in 1080i transmission." etc...

I don't believe that diplays have to do inverse telecine, as there is no motion between the interlaced frames to compensate for. But please explain more.

Obviously you didn't do your research. There are many many descriptions on the internet that go into the details of why 1080i and 1080p are essentially identical for movies. Here is another one:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=71 8139

Name one thing that makes HD-DVD "ready for market" that Bluray is failing in.

Picture quality. Here is one review. It is very typical.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/blu-ray_2.htm

The cheaper HD-DVD player is $500, /i

As a benchmark I went on Google's Froogle service and found the Samsung BluRay palyer (cheapest I have seen) low price is $850. On the same search site the Toshiba HD-DVD player was available for $420.

I am sure that better discounts can be found for both. But I'd bet the same ratio will apply.

I've found http://wwww.projectorcentral.com/ to be a very useful resource when wondering about projectors.

Oh, and http://www.google.com/ as well. Amazing what information is out there.

I feel the need to call fanboi on your entire response...

Sure there are die-hard, rabid, Playstation fanatics who would still buy one if the price was your first born. But if you look at the fact that Sony has always had lame launch titles, the PSP's consumer excitement around it's launch could be described as "apathetic" with the die hard fans camping out for a product that didn't even sell out....

Its true that the DS is handily beating the PSP in sales, especially since the DS Lite launched; but apathetic is alittle strong. The PSP is selling about half as well as the DS. That's still something like 200k units per month.

Considering that the DS or sales numbers were not even brought into the discussion, where the hell did this come from? The OP was describing the consumer exitement about the PSP and the less then spectacular launch titles for the system, which after the die hard $ony fans had gotten theirs, dropped to apathetic. I don't know anyone that was excited about the PSP mainly due to the lackluster titles at launch.

Root kit lost a lot of fans...

Rootkit fiasco lost a lot of nerd fans. Jo Q Public still has no clue. They don't even know what a rootkit is.

That's funny... I get asked all the time by people who know that I am into computers about it. It was featured on the network news, CNN, MSNBC, etc. etc.

... as did Sony's double talk arrogance and bad mouthing of their competition, and lets not forget the clear rip-offs of Nintendo's Wii-mote and Microsoft's Guide button,

Arrogance: check.

Wii rip-off: undecided. Its a natural progression, the tilt sensor they added, if you ask me. More likely this feature was bumped up in priority when Sony saw the impression the Wii remote made. I can see that one either way to be honest. This is sort of like saying that every single digital music player is ripping off the iPod.

MS 'guide' button: what are you talking about? I don't even know what this is. Hardly a feature that's touted as interesting, at any rate.

Natural progression? I think you hit the nail on the head, though. When $ony saw the impression that the Wii controller made, they made the feature a priority... it has nothing to do with saying digital music players are ripping off the i-pod. It's like another music player coming out with a click wheel.

and perhaps most importantly THE PRICE.

Price is bad, I agree. Way bad in comparison to the other consoles, specifically. Of course, we don't actually know the final price yet.

Ummm... where have you been? The price has been known for quite awhile now. $499 for the basic, $599 for upgraded system.

Heck the reason for the high price was because of the Blu-Ray drive, and reviews thus far have shown that HD-DVD is stomping all over Blu-Ray. Really! I'd like to see that. Cite a source?

Here
Here
and here

HD-DVD has 2 layer discs (15gig per layer/30gig total) and uses the awesome VC-1 codec.

So? Blu-ray has a max storage of 200 gigs, over six layers. The codec is irrelevant; you can write a Blu-ray disc with MPEG-2, or the awesome VC-1 codec, OR the 'even awesomer' AVC codec. HD-DVD can only use MS-approved codecs and by the way, that has DRM built-in to the wrapper. (H.264/AVC does not necessarily have this stipulation (weak praise I know), but ALL MS codecs will have to deal with this.)

A six layer blu-ray disk has not been produced outside of the lab, and may be years (if ever) before it is able to be mass produced. Where do you come up with that hd-dvd can only use MS approved codecs? You are just spouting FUD now, as blue-ra

http://www.projectorcentral.com/blu-ray_2.htm
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/busines s/14950018.htm

Basically Blu Ray is only single layer, loaded with advertisement (less room for movie content) and using the MPEG2 codec while HD-DVD is dual layer and using the VC-1 codec. walk into your local Best Buy and you should see some displays side by side, the differences are astounding... particularly because we waited longer for Blu Ray, it costs more and HD-DVD is still better quality.

I apologize for not citing sources for the HD-DVD over Blu-Ray debate. I figured it was common knowledge at this point, what with the AV forums buzzing about it.

The whole thing about Cell yields isn't that they're low (of course we expect them to be low when starting production) it's that its look like they'reFAR LOWER THEN EXPECTED.

And since you asked, I don't have a link but IIRC the last cost estimated the Cell and RSX chips cost Sony ~$110 a piece. No idea about how the RSX yeilds are. I'd almost be more conserned about RAM yeilds though.

I always got to AVS Forum and Projector Central for information on technology and reviews, etc.

I don't plan on buying a TV in the traditional sense next - I'm going to get a projector instead. They're portable, the viewing angle is never a consideration (since all the light is reflected to the viewer) and you can get as big a picture as you could possibly desire. There's nothing quite like watching a Monday night football game on the side of your neighbor's house!

Moreover, the money most people fork over for a plasma ($2000-$5000) can buy a projector that ranges from excellent to fabulously excellent.

By the same token, a highly decent projector can be had for $1000. Even $500, the cost of a mediocre 4:3 TV, will get you a nice little 4:3 projector that is at least as good as the TV if you don't mind the 2x DLP rainbows.

(Note: the MSRPs listed on ProjectorCentral should be cut in half to get street prices; ask Froogle. On top of that, the AE900 even has an additional $400 rebate, for a little while... that makes it cheaper than my 5-year-old AE100).

--
Dum de dum.

Moreover, the money most people fork over for a plasma ($2000-$5000) can buy a projector that ranges from excellent to fabulously excellent.

By the same token, a highly decent projector can be had for $1000. Even $500, the cost of a mediocre 4:3 TV, will get you a nice little 4:3 projector that is at least as good as the TV if you don't mind the 2x DLP rainbows.

(Note: the MSRPs listed on ProjectorCentral should be cut in half to get street prices; ask Froogle. On top of that, the AE900 even has an additional $400 rebate, for a little while... that makes it cheaper than my 5-year-old AE100).

--
Dum de dum.

Moreover, the money most people fork over for a plasma ($2000-$5000) can buy a projector that ranges from excellent to fabulously excellent.

By the same token, a highly decent projector can be had for $1000. Even $500, the cost of a mediocre 4:3 TV, will get you a nice little 4:3 projector that is at least as good as the TV if you don't mind the 2x DLP rainbows.

(Note: the MSRPs listed on ProjectorCentral should be cut in half to get street prices; ask Froogle. On top of that, the AE900 even has an additional $400 rebate, for a little while... that makes it cheaper than my 5-year-old AE100).

--
Dum de dum.

Take an expensive Sanyo projector with DVI in, an expensive Denon DVD player with DVI out, and what do you get? A waste of $20,000.

Some HDCP issue is preventing the devices from working together. Six months later there are some unhappy people, not least of whom are the vendors who still hasn't been paid.

A few points:

1) You can buy a $13,000 DVD player. Projector Central has a review of a cheaper, $200 DVD player that's almost as good. Perhaps this is a medium-high-end drive.

2) That $1800 is worst case, retail. They are probably shipping it out for $500, and the rest is added by middlemen along the way. It will show up at your local Costco for $700.

Analysts say the early adopters, those who rush out and buy whatever new technology becomes available, will jump right in and pay $1,800 US for a Blu-ray player from Pioneer or $499 US for the Toshiba HD DVD player.

Hmm, which one should I get?? This is typical Sony.

My understanding of the manufacturing of the discs themselves is that fabricating Blu-Ray discs requires complete retooling, while making HD-DVD discs only needs a retrofit of the equipment used to make standard DVDs. Then you add Sony itself to the equation...They have a long history of developing proprietary standards, which are arguably superior, but end up being so expensive for the consumer that they die (the standard, not the consumer :) ). I'm sure they want a pretty penny for Blu-Ray licensing as well. As it is I am sick of Sony and their fire-and-forget policy on practically all of their products - which is to roll out product and practically drop support immediately. Ever try to get new firmware for a Sony product? Ever try to do an out of warranty repair? It's usually cheaper and easier just to buy a new one. The cost for them to even _look_ at the problem is insane.

The fact that Toshiba's demo didn't work means nothing. Ultimately the marketplace will decide who wins, and the trump card in the marketplace is cost. If Blu-Ray sets don't come down to be competitive with HD-DVD, HD-DVD will win by default - just like VHS did.

FYI, Nintendo removed the digital A/V out in May 2004 from all Gamecube's to cut costs. See this.

Progressive Scan does not get you ANYTHING at all unless you have a TV that can play that progressivly scanned DVD.

Some monitors support progressive scan but do not support the higher frequencies of HDTV.

So you see, your clamoring for progressive scan and not caring about HD support doesn't really make any sense, as they are one in the same.

When contrasted with "high definition", "progressive scan" usually means "enhanced definition" or 480p. "High definition" is usually 720p or 1080i.

I have Panasonic PT L500U, and so far, it has been my best investment. for 2000 odd USD, I also got an extra lamp free (which otherwise cost 500USD).

Its compatible with 1080i, 720p, 525i as well as 625i. So all you need is a HD cable box (rented at 5$ per month from Comcast) and a progressive scan DVD player (preferrably with DVI), and you are all set for your own small theater!

Though I dont use it to watch regular TV (lamp life biggest restricting factor - normally between 1000 to 2000 hrs), I do use it for movies on DVD as well as INHD/HBO/MAX HDTV movies - and nothing beats watching HDTV contenct on BFS (Big F*cking Screen).

I see that you have been fooled by the marketing gimmicks. Let me clarify for you, so you don't get duped into thinking you're buying HD, when you actually are not.

Look at that link you provided and go to the line that says "Native" resolution. Notice that it says 1024x768. That means there is an array of mirrors on the DLP chip that is 1024 mirrors wide by 768 mirrors tall. Each one of these mirrors can display one pixel (ie, the color reflected off that mirror is the color of the pixel on the screen**). So the full 1024wide x 768tall represents the full picture on the screen. You can never get any more pixels in the width or any more pixels in the height, because you don't have any more mirrors on the DLP chip to give you those pixels.

Now, let's look at a 720p signal. A 720p signal is (digitally) 1280 pixels wide x 720 pixels tall. So, if you lay the 720p signal directly onto the mirrors on the DLP chip, 256 pixels would be hanging off the side, with no mirror to display them on the screen. The DLP chip is 1024 mirrors (pixels) wide, and the signal is 1280 pixels wide. Even though the signal is sending you more than 1024 pixels in width, it is physically impossible to display more than 1024 of those pixels ... you just can't, there are no mirrors to display them. So, what do we do, and what does the projector do?

The projector uses an internal scaler to remove some pixels, and remix the colors on other pixels. So, the scaler takes a 1280x720 signal, removes a bunch of pixels, remixes a bunch of other pixels, and gives you a new signal: 1024x576***. Hooray, this new signal is small enough to be displayed within our 1024x768 mirrors on our DLP chip. Sure, we are wasting some mirrors on the top and bottom (we need to retain the original aspect ratio so that the signal doesn't appear squished), but at least we can display the signal. These wasted pixels are the black bars on top and bottom that you see on the screen.

So you might ask, why is this not HD? Well, it's not HD because you've compressed the signal and lost some of the information from the original 720p (HD) signal. Heck, if you compress the signal even further, you can get a 853 x 480 signal (480p). Or you can compress even further and get a 64x36 pixel signal ... is that HD? Hell no. You could barey discern one blob from another in that signal.

So there you have it, hope this helps you out in your quest for HD. Just because it says it can display 1080i, doesn't mean the native resolution is 1920x1080. DLP projectors that can actually (truthfully) display a 1080i signal cost a minimum of $20,000.

**Well, it's actually more complicated than that because the mirrors only reflect white light from the lamp, but then it passes through the color wheel at the right time to project the proper color. But for simplicity of a resolution discussion, we'll leave the color wheel for some other time.

***This is called a WSVGA resolution, do a search for projectors with it ... oddly enough there are a bunch projectors at this resolution ... I wonder why?

More links:

Discussion on why broadcasters are using "i" signals versus "p" signals, ie 1080i, 720p, 480p. Note: DVDs are a 480i signal.

More information on HDTV and broadcasting than you probably care to know.

A

I see that you have been fooled by the marketing gimmicks. Let me clarify for you, so you don't get duped into thinking you're buying HD, when you actually are not.

Look at that link you provided and go to the line that says "Native" resolution. Notice that it says 1024x768. That means there is an array of mirrors on the DLP chip that is 1024 mirrors wide by 768 mirrors tall. Each one of these mirrors can display one pixel (ie, the color reflected off that mirror is the color of the pixel on the screen**). So the full 1024wide x 768tall represents the full picture on the screen. You can never get any more pixels in the width or any more pixels in the height, because you don't have any more mirrors on the DLP chip to give you those pixels.

Now, let's look at a 720p signal. A 720p signal is (digitally) 1280 pixels wide x 720 pixels tall. So, if you lay the 720p signal directly onto the mirrors on the DLP chip, 256 pixels would be hanging off the side, with no mirror to display them on the screen. The DLP chip is 1024 mirrors (pixels) wide, and the signal is 1280 pixels wide. Even though the signal is sending you more than 1024 pixels in width, it is physically impossible to display more than 1024 of those pixels ... you just can't, there are no mirrors to display them. So, what do we do, and what does the projector do?

The projector uses an internal scaler to remove some pixels, and remix the colors on other pixels. So, the scaler takes a 1280x720 signal, removes a bunch of pixels, remixes a bunch of other pixels, and gives you a new signal: 1024x576***. Hooray, this new signal is small enough to be displayed within our 1024x768 mirrors on our DLP chip. Sure, we are wasting some mirrors on the top and bottom (we need to retain the original aspect ratio so that the signal doesn't appear squished), but at least we can display the signal. These wasted pixels are the black bars on top and bottom that you see on the screen.

So you might ask, why is this not HD? Well, it's not HD because you've compressed the signal and lost some of the information from the original 720p (HD) signal. Heck, if you compress the signal even further, you can get a 853 x 480 signal (480p). Or you can compress even further and get a 64x36 pixel signal ... is that HD? Hell no. You could barey discern one blob from another in that signal.

So there you have it, hope this helps you out in your quest for HD. Just because it says it can display 1080i, doesn't mean the native resolution is 1920x1080. DLP projectors that can actually (truthfully) display a 1080i signal cost a minimum of $20,000.

**Well, it's actually more complicated than that because the mirrors only reflect white light from the lamp, but then it passes through the color wheel at the right time to project the proper color. But for simplicity of a resolution discussion, we'll leave the color wheel for some other time.

***This is called a WSVGA resolution, do a search for projectors with it ... oddly enough there are a bunch projectors at this resolution ... I wonder why?

More links:

Discussion on why broadcasters are using "i" signals versus "p" signals, ie 1080i, 720p, 480p. Note: DVDs are a 480i signal.

More information on HDTV and broadcasting than you probably care to know.

A

Most showrooms take good care of their showroom models. We're not talking about a car that gets test driven all the time by a bunch of goobers - this is a projector that the salesperson turns on for interested customers.
I bought one from them - 75% off list, had 20 hours on it, on a 1500 hour bulb. They warmed it up for me. All of their demo models are fully warranteed and have less than 100 hours - most substantially less.

2) It's not HD: XGA is 1024 x 768, it can not display a 720p signal.

Wrong. 1080i/720p

Any other complaints, or can we agree that you're wrong and that you can get a great home theater for just a couple grand?

http://www.projectorcentral.com/Acer-PD116P.htm

Cruise around on TigerDirect some more. There are many brand new HD DLPs for well below $3k.

I picked up an Acer PD116P there for about $850 (pre rebate). Granted it's only 800x600 with a native 4:3 aspect, but it accepts 720p and the high-def picture is exquisite. The PD525 has come down in price and it's higher res and higher brightness.

LCD vs. DLP

DLPs can be smaller, physically - but that wasn't one of the issues you mentioned. They can have smaller spacing between pixels, but that's not an issue with XGA or WXGA LCDs anymore. They can have higher contrast ratios (3000:1, say), but they do that at the expense of color saturation. So things are bright, but washed out. Meh.

And here. 1600 lumens, XGA, 2000:1 contrast ratio, 6.4 lbs, and $1200.

The PLV-70 can be had for about 4k. The Dalite hipower screen tripod king a few hundred. You can get a panasonic pt-ae700u 1280x720 pj for about $1700. Or an infocus X1 800x600 for $650.

I'd recommend a 60"-80" hipower screen to get a bright picture with a 1000 lumen pj.

For a list of great projectors:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/home-theater-proje ctors.htm

And try here for prices. You'll find that many PJ's can be found for much less than MSRP:
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

great site:
avsforum.com

Why I followed this stupid path, I don't know.

But you need to read the specs on your projector. It may take a 1280x1024 input, but all you get out is 1024x768. That's the "native resolution" of the NEC LT1. So with only 1024 pixels from left to right, anything higher is just going to be downsampled.

Here's the spec:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/pdf/projector_spec _2311.pdf

Oh, and with a 2k hour lamp life, you'll get 5.4 hours per day of use in it's first year. Be ready to pay $300 plus for a new lamp.
http://www.superwarehouse.com/NEC_Replacement_Lamp _for_LT10/LT10LP/p/354946

Why use a computer monitor? For better quality picture, lower cost to buy, longer life.

I disagree and will attempt to clarify my points below.

- Any modern HDTV will support both 720p and 1080i. There may be scaling going on (and the quality of that scaling is the point of the original article), but any modern device will happily display both.

My point was what the TV was capable of displaying *natively* without any rescaling... the point of the original artical as you say. Additionally I think you'll find that there are many TV's that do *not* support both formats through rescaling or natively. I purchased my HDTV less than a year a go and it, along with virtually all the TV's I looked at, didn't support one or the other standard at all. If I apply a 720p signal I get a scrambled screen.

Does this apply to all TV's? Certainly not, but it does to many and is something to consider when purchasing.

- DLP and LCD devices can certainly do scaling as well as anything else. CRT's are the only devices that can switch their native resolution, but with the proper signal DLP, LCD, and LCOS are all fine with 720p and 1080i.

Again, my point was in regards to native resolutions and avoiding rescaling. That your purchase is usually a tradeoff on which resolution you want to natively support. It's impossibly to get anything other than a CRT based system to handle both resolutions natively.

- I have never seen an HDTV device that accepts only its native resolution. At the very least, they've always accepted 480i (NTSC) and 480p (progressive scan DVD's) in addition to their native resolution. I haven't seen a device manufactured in the past three years that couldn't accept all current HDTV resolutions (that is, everything except 1080p).

Look again.. as I mentioned most of the TV's as of less than a year ago couldn't support both 720p and 1080i. You're right regarding the 480 based resolutions, I wasn't including those... I was only talking in terms of HD.

- Fox is not "way behind" in HDTV support: last season, they broadcast 6 or 7 HDTV football games a week. CBS did 2 HDTV gaames and the rest in SD.

They're catching up, but you mention Football. How many of their regular programming outside of sports is HD? Though I haven't looked lately, so it's possible the number is significantly higher than when I last looked. They were much later in adopting it than the other broadcasters.

- Most XBox games don't even support 720p. And again, native resolution is meaningless with a decent scaler, which more and more devices have built into them today.

True, not my point. THe next XBox games will all be HD (or so the rumor goes). Yet it will likey be 720p, so that's an issue. Rescaler again, IF the TV supports it and IF you don't mind the image being rescaled.

- "Most" projectors that are intended for home theater use are indeed HDTV capable today, though many of the cheaper ones (http://www.projectorcentral.com/ , http://www.avsforum.com/ , and good old Google.

No, most are capable of taking an HD signal that will get resized to the native resolution of the projector - usually 1024x768. Again a question of native vs rescaled.

Not trying to nitpic, but my main point was that you'll likely need a rescaler in a lot of places, and that your TV does not necessarily include one. If you want the best picture, pick the native resolution you'll use most. And to research and double check exactly what your proposed TV supports, they aren't always clear.

i have my projector (Sanyo Z2) set to 720p (not auto) to see if my Comcast HD cablebox sent out 720, and it does.

I tried sending 1080i, and (after changing the projector to 'auto' input) letting the Projector 'downscale' it, and it looked 95% as good (had to look for stuff and still couldn't find differences on some source material)

Yet...

I tried setting the cable box at 480p and letting the projector upscale, and didn't look as hot (I'm 114" from a 96" screen) -you could see the source material pixels at times, or artifacts from them.

If i send my DVD signal at 480p and let the projector upscale to 720p, not bad. But my DVD has a built-in upscaler (momitsu) that is nice, and having it send things at 720 down the component cables (or dvi) is better.

So, i'd say that Comcast in VA on the Scietific Atlanta 3250HD box isn't doing this "1080 / 2 then upscaling" trick, b/c the "720p" picture on my HD cable looks a lot better than either method of me feeding 480p and upscaling (and the projector has a highly rated upscaling chip)

my projector is 1280x720 native: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLV-Z2.htm

While that cute little metric may "work" for 4:3 CRT TVs (and some small widescreen TVs), it does not apply to a giant digital widescreen. 24 degrees horizontal x 14 degrees vertical simply does not come anywhere near approximating a theater experience. :(

Remember that the whole purpose of a having a giant 16:9 screen is to view it from approximately one screen width away. This closely mimics sitting in the sweet spot at a movie theater and gives you 45 degrees horizontal x 29 degrees vertical (* note: you'll also want to make sure that you're viewing level is above the center of the screen or you'll probably end up hurting your eyes and/or neck). Although you can technically discern individual pixels, you cannot see the borders of the pixels of a 1280x720 DLP front projector at that distance (96" x 54" wide screen, seated 96" = 8' away). The lack of a screen door effect causes your brain not to care, and you think you're at the movie theater watching a film.

The 102" plasma (88.9" x 50.0") would give you the same visual size at about 7.5', but its pixel edges are obviously more visible than DLP. However, the 50% higher pixel density of 1920x1080 (versus the 1280x720 I quoted earlier) helps make up for this fact. Thus, I'm going to claim that you should be able to watch this thing from 7.5' away. However, if the pixel edges are visible at that distance, you'd be better served to buy the less expensive DLP front projector. But if you're really intent on spending that kind of dough, you could get a 1920x1080 LCD front projector with 6000 ANSI lumens for the price of the 102" plasma. ;)

Oh and as a side note, the 6000 lumen projector would probably wash out the plasma if you projected directly onto its screen! This could give a whole new meaning to picture in picture! :P

While that cute little metric may "work" for 4:3 CRT TVs (and some small widescreen TVs), it does not apply to a giant digital widescreen. 24 degrees horizontal x 14 degrees vertical simply does not come anywhere near approximating a theater experience. :(

Remember that the whole purpose of a having a giant 16:9 screen is to view it from approximately one screen width away. This closely mimics sitting in the sweet spot at a movie theater and gives you 45 degrees horizontal x 29 degrees vertical (* note: you'll also want to make sure that you're viewing level is above the center of the screen or you'll probably end up hurting your eyes and/or neck). Although you can technically discern individual pixels, you cannot see the borders of the pixels of a 1280x720 DLP front projector at that distance (96" x 54" wide screen, seated 96" = 8' away). The lack of a screen door effect causes your brain not to care, and you think you're at the movie theater watching a film.

The 102" plasma (88.9" x 50.0") would give you the same visual size at about 7.5', but its pixel edges are obviously more visible than DLP. However, the 50% higher pixel density of 1920x1080 (versus the 1280x720 I quoted earlier) helps make up for this fact. Thus, I'm going to claim that you should be able to watch this thing from 7.5' away. However, if the pixel edges are visible at that distance, you'd be better served to buy the less expensive DLP front projector. But if you're really intent on spending that kind of dough, you could get a 1920x1080 LCD front projector with 6000 ANSI lumens for the price of the 102" plasma. ;)

Oh and as a side note, the 6000 lumen projector would probably wash out the plasma if you projected directly onto its screen! This could give a whole new meaning to picture in picture! :P

It would be one thing if the bulbs were resonably priced but paying $500 every six months for new bulbs when the machine only cost $800 is silly.

Respectfully; what the hell are you talking about?
Here is the spec sheet for a projector that I just picked up on ebay ($600).

The life of the bulb on this projector is 2000 hours.

So:
2000Hrs/6Mo = 333.3333...
333.3333Hrs/30 Days = 11.111...

But if you use them a lot, as your normal TV
You watch TV an average of more than 11 Hours a day?

I know, the projectors that you are probably talking about (seeing as how you quoted a price of $800) have shorter bulb lives, but even at 1500 Hr bulb life, that's still over 8 hrs a day of TV.
If you watch more than 8 hours of TV a day, then you probably have as much trouble dealing with real life (not developing bed sores) as you do with bulb life.

One PC, one BenQ PB6200 DLP projector, and a smattering of amplifiers and and speakers. Why convert to NTSC or anything else when VGA does just fine. For the richer of us, one could even use a DVI projector.

I got about 1/3 through the article but I had to open the door cause it was gettin too thick in here. I wonder if the projectors they use are going to be near as good as this one.

Haha, like one of these?

Actually, TI already has begun manufacture of a 1080 DLP chip. The xHD3 chip was demoed at a trade show back in February in a Samsung RPTV prototype and should be out in the market by the end of the year.

Thanks for the heads up on the new 1080 DLP chips coming down the pike. But even if that hits the consumer market, it'll still be damn expensive. DLP projectors are often twice the cost of LCD at the same resolution, so I still bet is that most consumers will have to wait a couple generations before this hits a price range the conusmer market can afford.

Oh, and there's been a 1080p LCoS set out for about a year now. Unfortunately, Toshiba is discontinuing it because its LCoS chip provider couldn't keep up with the demand.

So you aren't talking about the JVC DLA-SX21U, because that LCoS unit offers a native 4x3 resolution of 1400x1050; just shy of 1080 lines. Looked like a nice unit, but waaaay out of my price range. And it doesn't meet the OPer's definition of meeting "real" 1920x1080 resolution either.

BTW, thanks for the interresting reply.
--Maynard

But my screen is 117" diag made by Carada, and the image is generated by a Sony HS-20 Front Projector. You can get a very good Panasonic AE500 for about $1750 these days, and over at AVS Forum there are plans for cheap wall mounted screens using materials available from Home Depot. With a $200 STB, and cheap sound system you could get away with having a full home theater with a +100" diag screen for less than $2500 easy. And yeah, it's worth it! :) JMO... --M