Projectors?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-06-02 04:07pm

I think this is finally the time for HD -- at least in the US -- since the FCC is finally mandating the phaseout of NTSC transmission by 2005-6, IIRC. All the local broadcasters are up in arms (since ATSC equipment isn't cheap) but it is being rammed down their throats whether they like it or not.

As for matching computer resolution...yes, you can. If you've got the money, you could get a 1920x1080 progressive-scan CRT projector. It'll cost you an arm and a leg and require professional calibration, but yes, you can do it.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-02 04:16pm

phongn wrote:I think this is finally the time for HD -- at least in the US -- since the FCC is finally mandating the phaseout of NTSC transmission by 2005-6, IIRC. All the local broadcasters are up in arms (since ATSC equipment isn't cheap) but it is being rammed down their throats whether they like it or not.

That's another year or two, and we still have to wait for the HD-DVD situation to shake out, and then there's a phase-in period after that where the early adopters snap it up and the rest of us wait until the prices drop to the point that HD-DVD begins to displace DVD on retail store shelves and manufacturing capacity ramps up for the new Blu-ray discs even though the fabbers are saying it will be far more difficult and expensive to press them. Assuming everything goes according to plan.

As for matching computer resolution...yes, you can. If you've got the money, you could get a 1920x1080 progressive-scan CRT projector. It'll cost you an arm and a leg and require professional calibration, but yes, you can do it.

Heh heh ... not worth it.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-06-02 04:21pm

Ah, yes, I forgot about the upcoming standards war between BD-ROM and HD-DVD. Grr. Possibly the only good effect of that is that Microsoft is forced to open up the specificiation to WM9 since it is one of the approved codecs for HD-DVD. BD-ROM is staying with MPEG2, IIRC.

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2004-06-02 04:32pm

phongn wrote:As for matching computer resolution...yes, you can. If you've got the money, you could get a 1920x1080 progressive-scan CRT projector. It'll cost you an arm and a leg and require professional calibration, but yes, you can do it.

1920x1080, that's a very wide. Almost unnecessarily so; can commercial graphics cards even support that resolution?

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-06-02 08:21pm

Darth Wong wrote: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.

That would explain your massive porn DVD collection. Must be fun watching full, life size people fucking on screen. Bastard.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-06-02 09:04pm

InnocentBystander wrote:1920x1080, that's a very wide. Almost unnecessarily so; can commercial graphics cards even support that resolution?

My video card (and monitor) supports 2048x1536, so yes, you could go that high. 1920x1080 is one of the HDTV resolutions as well.

The highest single-display resolution I've seen is 3840x2400 (which requires special video cards, usually the Parhelia HR256).

Laird · Post by **Laird** » 2004-06-02 10:44pm

Darth Wong wrote:
PS. I have a projector.

Your not the only one, my credit card bill got paid off finally and mine arrived last week.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-06-03 03:56am

Gandalf wrote:Me, for one.

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

And you'd rather get a projector which creates more heat rather than an air conditioner which reduces said heat?

A little wall-mounted AC isn't that expensive.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-03 04:29am

Uraniun235 wrote:
Gandalf wrote:Me, for one.

I have no AC in my house. In the 40C summer days here we basically have to keep the computer off.
And you'd rather get a projector which creates more heat rather than an air conditioner which reduces said heat?

A little wall-mounted AC isn't that expensive.

I didn't know projectors radiated heat.

Also, as I live in a rented property I'm not able to install things like an AC.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-06-03 04:46am

Oh yes projectors radiate heat, even those small ones. That is a big, bright bulb inside of them.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-06-03 01:51pm

Gandalf wrote:I didn't know projectors radiated heat.

Also, as I live in a rented property I'm not able to install things like an AC.

Not even if you talk to the manager/owner and beg his permission?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-03 02:07pm

Darth Wong wrote: 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.

I think you mean lets you see the pixels, but I get your point.

Actually though, even for movies, I prefer a 50"-70" screen with a decent scaler rather than a 100", but to each his own.

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.

Don't make this a black or white fallacy, there are many reasons behind the lowering of DVD prices and consoles like the PS2 and to a lesser extent the Xbox played an important role. Do you remember the original Sony pitch that they could buy a DVD player and they'd be getting the PS2 for free? This was a big part of the early PS2 popularity and it frustrated manufacturers that were trying to sell $300 DVD decks.

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.

You may have been hearing it, but not from me.

The use of broadcast native HD content is a ways off but HD IS right around the corner for the consoles and if one is going to buy the next-gen consoles anyways (which I am) you'll be getting an Blu-Ray/HD-DVD deck for free so why not be an early adopter? Can you honestly tell me you DON'T want to see LOTR in 1080i?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-03 02:12pm

phongn wrote: The highest single-display resolution I've seen is 3840x2400 (which requires special video cards, usually the Parhelia HR256).

There's a new IBM monitor for medical applications that runs at 6000x4500 and requires a special four GPU card.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-06-03 02:40pm

I haven't seen that one -- I was only familiar with their T221 display, which requires that Matrox card.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-03 08:37pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Gandalf wrote:I didn't know projectors radiated heat.

Also, as I live in a rented property I'm not able to install things like an AC.
Not even if you talk to the manager/owner and beg his permission?

Nope, this is the same bloke who withheld the key to the power box to my house. This was a contributing factor to my getting nearly shocked to death a few weeks ago.

Besides, we're looking at moving soon.