Projectors?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-01 10:14am

Having recently come across a source of income, the prospect of building my own computer has come up. And since I like the finer things in life, I was thinking of getting a projector. Theoretically I could have a reasonably clear 1m by 1m screen on my wall.

But for just pure gaming and movie watching purposes, are they worth it?

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-06-01 06:48pm

What they don't tell you about projectors is that the bulbs only last 3000-5000 hours, and cost $400-500 or so to replace. Assuming you use your computer about 5 hours a day, that bulb will last about 2-3 years. Ouch. Stick with LCD or CRT screens unless you have loads of money to spare.

Edit: The reason the bulbs cost so damn much is because they use metal-halide bulbs, which are basically mini-arclights. They're the only thing that's small & bright enough to produce a point source of high quality light.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-01 08:25pm

aerius wrote:What they don't tell you about projectors is that the bulbs only last 3000-5000 hours, and cost $400-500 or so to replace. Assuming you use your computer about 5 hours a day, that bulb will last about 2-3 years. Ouch. Stick with LCD or CRT screens unless you have loads of money to spare.

Holy fuckmonkeys.

I was planning minimum 8-10 hours a day.

Thanks for your counsel, I shall now just try for a flatscreen thing.

Icehawk · Post by **Icehawk** » 2004-06-01 09:12pm

Heh, I remember a few years back one of my friends had a projector and we used to hook it up to his PC and watch Dragon Ball Z bigscreen on his wall. Granted, the colours were a little bit off and it only displayed in 640x480 but it was still cool watching it in big size rather than huddling around our 15 inch comp monitors.

That does suck that the projector bulbs only last a few years. I had intended to get one myself at some point but now its outta the question unless I somehow start making big bucks.

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2004-06-01 09:24pm

By the time you need a new bulb the prices will probably be lower, but yeah. My friends stole one of those from my school and used it to watch porno on his wall. Boobs the size of my head, and I have a pretty damn big head. Ofcourse he spent 3 nights in jail for it. And then two years later while still on probation he shoplifted some YuGiOh cards and is back in jail for a much longer time. But hey, it was worth it to me cause I really didn't like him.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-01 09:46pm

Don't be so quick to dismiss projectors; they make awesome home theatre gear. It's not so good as a replacement for a computer monitor for many reasons, but for home theatre it really works, and is more economical than any alternative.

A decent projector can produce a 100" image. Just try getting that kind of huge picture with any kind of CRT or plasma unit. And they're far more economical as well; a typical projector is much cheaper than a huge 70" rear-projection unit, and much more convenient: it does not weigh 300lbs unlike the rear-projection TV, and it does not need periodic professional re-alignment (which costs several hundred dollars and requires a house-call) of the guns.

The picture is admittedly not quite as sharp or clear as a plasma or a CRT, but there are times when quantity has a quality all its own, and a 100" picture qualifies as one of those times.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-01 09:52pm

Can one projector hook up to a computer and serve as a TV replacement?

Ledaal Aishar Malakai · Post by **Ledaal Aishar Malakai** » 2004-06-01 09:53pm

Of course, the cable problems will be interesting, considering you'll have to sit about six feet back at leats to take in the whole picture.

But on the plus side, you can actually fight life-size enemies in FPS games for once...

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2004-06-01 10:24pm

Projectors are nice, but if you can, just go big screen TV, 60'.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-06-01 11:33pm

Darth Wong wrote:Don't be so quick to dismiss projectors; they make awesome home theatre gear. It's not so good as a replacement for a computer monitor for many reasons, but for home theatre it really works, and is more economical than any alternative.

Definitely, but you still gotta keep bulb life in mind so you don't want to be using the thing 10 hours a day. One of my friends uses the following solution, he has a decent but not great TV for watching the news, sports, and for his GF's assorted programs. The projector gets used only for watching movies or special events so it only gets limited use, maybe 4-10 hours a week.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-01 11:50pm

Darth Wong wrote: A decent projector can produce a 100" image. Just try getting that kind of huge picture with any kind of CRT or plasma unit.

There's a reason why 100" is a maximum rated figure for most of these projectors, because they look like shit at that size. Remember, these projectors use the same LCD and DLP hardware as the rear projections, so your talking about a fixed number of pixels here (even the best DLP projectors don't usually break 1280x760) so when you stretch it over 100", it looks like utter shit. I've owned a high end DLP projector before and 50" is about the optimal size for it.

And they're far more economical as well; a typical projector is much cheaper than a huge 70" rear-projection unit, and much more convenient: it does not weigh 300lbs unlike the rear-projection TV, and it does not need periodic professional re-alignment (which costs several hundred dollars and requires a house-call) of the guns.

Actually they do need to be adjusted, especially from the factory. They CAN be cheaper, but once you factor in the cost of the projector ($1500 for a good DLP unit with a decent scaler chip), a replacement bulb ($400 roughly), the screen (varies but usually is about $200 for a good pulldown) and mouting epuipment, your looking at enough to purchase a kick ass rear projector.

Also, projectors tend to produce a great deal of heat which can be a problem during the summers.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-06-02 01:46am

Also, projectors tend to produce a great deal of heat which can be a problem during the summers.

Come on. Who could afford to blow a huge wad of money on a projector, presumably in concert with some kickass stereo equipment in order to create a great home theater experience, and not be able to invest in air conditioning?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-06-02 02:42am

Darth Wong wrote:The picture is admittedly not quite as sharp or clear as a plasma or a CRT, but there are times when quantity has a quality all its own, and a 100" picture qualifies as one of those times.

In my experience the sharpness is actually better than large televisions (save plasma of course). The other nice thing is the essentially perfect off-axis performance of a projector.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-06-02 04:29am

Projectors are great for movie watching but I did not find them too useful in gaming. For some reasons it does not feel right when playing with a projector.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-02 08:55am

Uraniun235 wrote:
Also, projectors tend to produce a great deal of heat which can be a problem during the summers.
Come on. Who could afford to blow a huge wad of money on a projector, presumably in concert with some kickass stereo equipment in order to create a great home theater experience, and not be able to invest in air conditioning?

Me, for one.

I have no AC in my house. In the 40C summer days here we basically have to keep the computer off.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-06-02 09:46am

Introducing to you the worlds most awesome projector:

http://www.planetarium-stuttgart.de/pag ... jektor.htm

850kg!

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2004-06-02 10:40am

TV's and projectors can never match the resolution computer monitors can hit. If you like playing games on 1600x1200 you need a good monitor, nothing else will work (maybe those new plasma's might, I can't say I know a lot about them).
How much do you acutally have to spend?

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2004-06-02 11:06am

I really haven't looked around, but the cheapest one I've seen is a even thousand US.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-02 11:14am

If you want a good compromise, use a 33" TV and a projector with a pulldown screen. 33" TVs are cheap, and while a 100" picture doesn't look that good when you get close to it, the point is that it creates a huge picture that takes up a whole wall of a large darkened living room, thus generating a far more immersive movie experience than a smaller picture, no matter how sharp. For ordinary TV watching, roll up the screen and watch the 33" TV.

PS. I have a projector.

J · Post by J » 2004-06-02 11:30am

Darth Wong wrote:PS. I have a projector.

*adds Mike to list of people to rob*
I'm sure you can spare a DVD player and a projector...

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-02 02:18pm

Darth Wong wrote:If you want a good compromise, use a 33" TV and a projector with a pulldown screen. 33" TVs are cheap, and while a 100" picture doesn't look that good when you get close to it, the point is that it creates a huge picture that takes up a whole wall of a large darkened living room, thus generating a far more immersive movie experience than a smaller picture, no matter how sharp. For ordinary TV watching, roll up the screen and watch the 33" TV.

That's a good compromise, but the problem is that you're looking at using a projector as your sole source of HD content (unless you want to spend quite a bit on that 33" TV) and because of the limited pixels, you won't be able to display full 1080i/p and the 760p won't look all that great due to the large screen.

Some people might say "who gives a shit?" because of the lack of HD programming, but if you are going to set up a system that will still have some punch when HD-DVD comes out in the next 18 months you want full 1080i/p compatability on such a big screen.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-02 02:27pm

The Kernel wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:If you want a good compromise, use a 33" TV and a projector with a pulldown screen. 33" TVs are cheap, and while a 100" picture doesn't look that good when you get close to it, the point is that it creates a huge picture that takes up a whole wall of a large darkened living room, thus generating a far more immersive movie experience than a smaller picture, no matter how sharp. For ordinary TV watching, roll up the screen and watch the 33" TV.
That's a good compromise, but the problem is that you're looking at using a projector as your sole source of HD content (unless you want to spend quite a bit on that 33" TV) and because of the limited pixels, you won't be able to display full 1080i/p and the 760p won't look all that great due to the large screen.

That projector serves the sole purpose of playing DVDs, which are not HD.

Some people might say "who gives a shit?" because of the lack of HD programming, but if you are going to set up a system that will still have some punch when HD-DVD comes out in the next 18 months you want full 1080i/p compatability on such a big screen.

Early adopters are also known by another name: "suckers". When HD-DVD content is out, and HD-DVD players are out, and HD playback equipment is at a reasonable price, you can simply buy an HD projector at that time. In the meantime, use a DVD-grade projector. This "throwing your money away" idea is silly; the cost of HD equiment is enormous right now, and paying for it (while sacrificing picture size and convenience) before it becomes more common and the price goes down is the real way to throw money away.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-06-02 02:40pm

Darth Wong wrote: PS. I have a projector.

Yes, but you also have a well paying job.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-02 03:43pm

Darth Wong wrote: That projector serves the sole purpose of playing DVDs, which are not HD.

What about Xbox HD gaming? What about HD programming? These are but a few of the current uses for HD equipment.

Early adopters are also known by another name: "suckers". When HD-DVD content is out, and HD-DVD players are out, and HD playback equipment is at a reasonable price, you can simply buy an HD projector at that time. In the meantime, use a DVD-grade projector. This "throwing your money away" idea is silly; the cost of HD equiment is enormous right now, and paying for it (while sacrificing picture size and convenience) before it becomes more common and the price goes down is the real way to throw money away.

You CAN buy HD equipment for a reasonable price, just not as a front projector.

As for early adopters being suckers, consider this:

1) The next-gen game consoles (which will debut, as always, at dumped prices) will almost certainly universally support HD resolutions.

2) HD-DVD is NOT a major modification over the standard DVD spec and in fact does not require a major redesign but a single new laser and a control chip in existing equipment. Blu-Ray will probably be more expensive, but not much so since the PS3 is slated to use Blu-Ray and it will debut at $300 as always. Remember, it was game consoles that brought the price of DVD down in the first place, and this time it should be even more so since Sony is going to use the PS3 to push universal acceptance of Blu-Ray.

So the question is, why buy front projectors when you can get slightly smaller units that support HD resolutions at the same prices when HD content is here and the floodgates opening is just on the horizon?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-02 04:02pm

The Kernel wrote:What about Xbox HD gaming? What about HD programming? These are but a few of the current uses for HD equipment.

I don't use a big screen for XBox right now, and I have no interest in seeing Tom Brokaw's face on a 100" screen. The only thing I want a big screen for is movies; they're the only thing that really benefits from the immersive big-wall treatment. Huge-screen gaming simply lets you see the polygons.

You CAN buy HD equipment for a reasonable price, just not as a front projector.

As for early adopters being suckers, consider this:

1) The next-gen game consoles (which will debut, as always, at dumped prices) will almost certainly universally support HD resolutions.

I've played XBox HD on a demonstrator box. While it's obviously sharper, it only means sharper corners on polygons as far as I'm concerned. I didn't walk away feeling that I was missing out on anything. The underlying graphics capability isn't there to really use the very high resolution. Hell, I don't even use max resolution on computer games.

2) HD-DVD is NOT a major modification over the standard DVD spec and in fact does not require a major redesign but a single new laser and a control chip in existing equipment. Blu-Ray will probably be more expensive, but not much so since the PS3 is slated to use Blu-Ray and it will debut at $300 as always. Remember, it was game consoles that brought the price of DVD down in the first place, and this time it should be even more so since Sony is going to use the PS3 to push universal acceptance of Blu-Ray.

You're telling me that DVD player and movie prices were driven down by the PS2 rather than the popularity of the DVD format for movies? You must be joking.

So the question is, why buy front projectors when you can get slightly smaller units that support HD resolutions at the same prices when HD content is here and the floodgates opening is just on the horizon?

With all due respect, I've been hearing that "HD is right around the corner" bullshit since I was your age. I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'll watch movies on my 100" screen while the early adopters wait with wallets in hand to eagerly blow just as much money on HD TVs that are a small fraction of the size.