Return to the CurtPalme.com main site CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum
A forum with a sense of fun and community for Home Theater enthusiasts!
Products for Sale ] [ FAQ: Hooking it all up ] [ CRT Primer/FAQ ] [ Best/Worst CRT Projectors List ] [ Setup Tips & Manuals ] [ Advanced Procedures ] [ Newsletters ]

 
Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Photo AlbumsPhoto Albums  RegisterRegister 
 MembershipClub Membership   ProfileProfile   Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in 
Blu-ray disc release list and must-have titles. Buy the latest and best Blu-ray titles to show off in your home theater!


1080p Mod for Sony Qualia 004

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly view    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> Digital Projectors
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:40 pm    Post subject: 1080p Mod for Sony Qualia 004 Reply with quote


        Register to remove this ad. It's free!
Just wondering if anyone here (curt,.. mac,.. anyone else who knows Smile ) knows how to do the 1080p modification to the projector so it can accept 1080p signal?

I apparently got one that wasn't modified, but I didn't even notice it until I checked the resolution going to the projector (the PC auto setup for 1920x1080), which says 1080/60i which I assume is interlaced? Again, visually I couldn't even tell, so not sure how much better the 1080p mod would be, but if its viable to do, I want to get it done.

Also, a JVC G10U lamp (the lamp in the housing) will work in this projector, its a 420w Luxtel/Cermax Xenon, and honestly aside from the slight lack of brightness, it looks beautiful.

So cheapskates out there like me who find Cermax/Luxtel Elliptical Type C lamps on the cheap, a 420w will work, and probably anything up to 700w (the original lamp wattage)

Merry Christmas to you all!! Smile

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
gjaky



Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2650
Location: Budapest, Hungary


PostLink    Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The interlaced term is meaningless in the digital world, they completely work differently. So sending it an interlaced resolution will force the projector to use itsdeinterlace algorithm first, I bet the mod is probably a simple EDID extension mod.
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB
Back to top
View user's photo album (1 photos)
Curt Palme
CRT Tech


Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 23731
Location: Langley, BC

TV/Projector: All of them!


PostLink    Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I can tell you is that it was a $3500 mod done by Sony by either replacing or adding a PC board. Not a simple fix.
Back to top
gjaky



Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2650
Location: Budapest, Hungary


PostLink    Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What interesting is that the maximal H freq. is 72kHz, and the maximal V freq is 92Hz, so based only on specs it should accept 1080P, at least through RGBHV, but that's pointless...
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB
Back to top
View user's photo album (1 photos)
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure if it does do 1080p through the rgbhv, it may, I haven't tried any other input other than HDMI. I know that the 1080p upgrade is mainly for the HDMI only, so its possible.

Either way it really isn't a big deal, I'm actually using it right now to browse the forum, its so crispy and it blows away all the other sony LCoS projectors I've gotten to use. I need to get my JVC RS10 repaired so I can do comparisons. So far though, the color and white accuracy is astounding, I can't wait to get the 700w xenon and see it then.

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2014 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I've read, if you have something capable of transmitting 1080p24sf, even an unmodded Qualia will accept that. The "sf" at the end stands for "sequential field" IIRC and is essentially an odd way of transmitting a 1080p24 signal in a 1080i48-ish package. I know Lumagen's processors are capable of this.

Even if you send a 1080p24 source as a 1080i60 signal, the Qualia should have no problem re-assembling the original frames and displaying them properly at 1080p24. It's not doing any temporal de-interlacing, only re-weaving a progressive frame split into 2 interlaced fields and transmitted at a 3:2 cadence. This subject came up a lot in the early days of the HD wars when HDDVD players were limited to 1080i60 output while BD players were doing 1080p60. At the time nothing above 1080p24 (and in a couple rare instances 1080p30) was available anyways, so the whole 1080i60 transmission vs 1080p60 was pure marketing bull.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was just wondering, do you guys think the Darbee would help out the signal? I have seen a lot of talk about it on the net, and almost unanimously everyone agrees that it does improve the signal in the video chain.
_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeremy112 wrote:
I was just wondering, do you guys think the Darbee would help out the signal? I have seen a lot of talk about it on the net, and almost unanimously everyone agrees that it does improve the signal in the video chain.


I've read loads of positive and almost no negative about it, even from die-hard purists who insist that processing only be used to move a display closer to established standards as opposed to suiting personal taste. Sounds like a pretty great piece of equipment.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
ecrabb
Forum Moderator


Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HogPilot wrote:
Even if you send a 1080p24 source as a 1080i60 signal, the Qualia should have no problem re-assembling the original frames and displaying them properly at 1080p24. It's not doing any temporal de-interlacing, only re-weaving a progressive frame split into 2 interlaced fields and transmitted at a 3:2 cadence. This subject came up a lot in the early days of the HD wars when HDDVD players were limited to 1080i60 output while BD players were doing 1080p60. At the time nothing above 1080p24 (and in a couple rare instances 1080p30) was available anyways, so the whole 1080i60 transmission vs 1080p60 was pure marketing bull.

Absolutely correct. I was going to post as much, but you beat me to it.

HogPilot wrote:
Jeremy112 wrote:
I was just wondering, do you guys think the Darbee would help out the signal? I have seen a lot of talk about it on the net, and almost unanimously everyone agrees that it does improve the signal in the video chain.


I've read loads of positive and almost no negative about it, even from die-hard purists who insist that processing only be used to move a display closer to established standards as opposed to suiting personal taste. Sounds like a pretty great piece of equipment.


Totally agree. I understand the concern from some (like Craig Rounds) that it adds unnecessary information to the signal, but it's not like displays are perfect. In most cases, they're deficient in terms of ANSI contrast, the color gamut is already compromised significantly from reality. Yes, there's a standard that the content is mastered to, and yes our displays should faithfully attempt to reproduce content to that standard, but I see no reason why we can't or shouldn't use something similar to the "treble" and "bass" knobs on a stereo to suit our tastes or the content.

Having seen it used plenty of times, on several different displays, including new JVC and Sony front projectors, I'll definitely have one in my system at some point. As long as you don't get carried away with the effect, I like it.

Cheers,
SC
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 7:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ecrabb wrote:
HogPilot wrote:
I've read loads of positive and almost no negative about it, even from die-hard purists who insist that processing only be used to move a display closer to established standards as opposed to suiting personal taste. Sounds like a pretty great piece of equipment.


Totally agree. I understand the concern from some (like Craig Rounds) that it adds unnecessary information to the signal, but it's not like displays are perfect. In most cases, they're deficient in terms of ANSI contrast, the color gamut is already compromised significantly from reality. Yes, there's a standard that the content is mastered to, and yes our displays should faithfully attempt to reproduce content to that standard, but I see no reason why we can't or shouldn't use something similar to the "treble" and "bass" knobs on a stereo to suit our tastes or the content.

Having seen it used plenty of times, on several different displays, including new JVC and Sony front projectors, I'll definitely have one in my system at some point. As long as you don't get carried away with the effect, I like it.

Cheers,
SC


Exactly. There's been plenty of discussion to date that - despite all the standards for greyscale and gamut (and more recently for gamma) - there are no standards for display contrast (neither on/off nor ANSI). Of everything that can be adjusted on a display, both types of contrast are probably the least likely to match whatever was used to master the material we watch given the wide range of combinations of on/off and ANSI from display to display (not to mention the even wider range of viewing environments).

Given what I've read of the Darbee processing, it seems that it offers enhancements to perceived contrast, sharpness, and detail, resulting in more "depth" to the image. If anything it could be argued that it tries to perceptually compensate for some of the shortcomings of most consumer displays. One could conceptually argue both sides of the coin, and generally I shy away from any processing that doesn't seek to reproduce the source material as accurately as possible. However I think it's hard to argue that it doesn't improve both our material and displays overall.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the input guys, I think I will have to order a Darbee and try it out. I 'm quite curious to see how it works out in my video chain.

So far I'm apparently enjoying the Qualia, already watched 3 movies and put 10 hours of use on it since I received it on Christmas Eve. It's GREAT to have a nice projector for myself again! Laughing

As for modding the qualia, I doubt I'll do anything to it, it looks good enough the way it is. I plan on buying a new video processor soon so maybe I'll keep my eye out for one that can do 1080p24sf. So far though I am loving the outstanding quality of this projector.

Hog, what was the main reason for selling your VW200? 4K? What were your opinions on it. I ask because the only 3 Sony PJs that I know of to use Xenon lamps are the VW100, VW200, and the Qualia.

Once I actually manage a stand of some sort for the projector in its current temporary home, I'll post a screenshot or 2 of it in action.

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeremy112 wrote:
I plan on buying a new video processor soon so maybe I'll keep my eye out for one that can do 1080p24sf.


Would one of the newer Lumagens be out of your price range? Even the 2020 offers the same Darby processing that an external Darblet would. I don't know of any other VP out there that does 1080p24sf, so you could kill 2 birds with one stone on this Smile

Jeremy112 wrote:
Hog, what was the main reason for selling your VW200? 4K? What were your opinions on it. I ask because the only 3 Sony PJs that I know of to use Xenon lamps are the VW100, VW200, and the Qualia.


I moved into a bigger house with no basement, and there's no space for a dedicated theater. I sold most of my theater gear - and still need to move some more actually - and this included the VW200. I really loved the image it threw though - very sharp, nicely saturated colors from the Xenon lamp, and black levels that surprised me given how much time I've spent with JVC projectors. It's not as bright as the Qualia, but in most other aspects it seemed that people who owned both liked the VW200's performance a little better overall.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's too bad to hear your new home doesn't have the room for a theater, but I'm sure it was a compromise worth making if the house suits your needs Smile

As for the lumagen, I've actually spent a great deal of time going over the ones for sale here on CP. I'd like to get the Radiance 2123 since it has everything I need - and then some. Along with the darbee, would the 2123 do 1080p24sf? I assume so since you probably wouldn't have suggested them otherwise Razz

I am curious on one feature of the 2123 - the dual HDMI outputs - can they be used at the same time for blending/stacking? what would be the purpose of needing 2 HDMI outputs otherwise?

I agree about the color from the xenon lamp - its really something that you have to see to get the idea of the image. It's just too bad that xenon lamps are so pricey; as I would love to see a newer JVC with a xenon lamp.

I went with the Qualia over the VW100/200 mainly because from what I read, the Qualia was a better performer overall than the VW100 (aside from contrast), and it has a high powered lamp which is sure to give a bright image for a big screen (I am hoping to be able to do about a 11-14ft cinemascope screen in the new theater) The VW200 is honestly just a bit too expensive IMO for what it is. Not that its over-priced, but being that 4K projectors are out and about now, I was looking more or less to get a fairly decent (maybe not the greatest) 1080 projector to hold me off until used 4K projectors become more of a norm.

If the qualia can last me 3-4 years I'll be quite satisfied with that, I expect to have to replace the lamp at least once during that period.

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeremy112 wrote:
That's too bad to hear your new home doesn't have the room for a theater, but I'm sure it was a compromise worth making if the house suits your needs Smile


To be honest, with my flying schedule I'd been using my theater a lot less in the last year or so, and now with our 2-month old daughter it would probably just about never get used. The new house is in a great location that's a much easier commute for the wife and I, it's in an awesome school district, and it's got more square footage and room to grow into. Housing in the NOVA/DC area is insanely expensive, so losing the theater was a compromise I had to make to get a big, renovated house at the price point we did.

Jeremy112 wrote:
As for the lumagen, I've actually spent a great deal of time going over the ones for sale here on CP. I'd like to get the Radiance 2123 since it has everything I need - and then some. Along with the darbee, would the 2123 do 1080p24sf? I assume so since you probably wouldn't have suggested them otherwise Razz


Yep, every current model of Radiance does 1080p24sf.

Jeremy112 wrote:
I am curious on one feature of the 2123 - the dual HDMI outputs - can they be used at the same time for blending/stacking? what would be the purpose of needing 2 HDMI outputs otherwise?


They can be used at the same time, but probably not for a blend or stack. My understanding is that you'd need individual CMS's per output for a blend/stack, and the Radiance doesn't have the separate processing pipeline to allow for running 2 separate CMS settings at the same time - you can only clone output 1 to output 2.

Jeremy112 wrote:
I went with the Qualia over the VW100/200 mainly because from what I read, the Qualia was a better performer overall than the VW100 (aside from contrast), and it has a high powered lamp which is sure to give a bright image for a big screen (I am hoping to be able to do about a 11-14ft cinemascope screen in the new theater) The VW200 is honestly just a bit too expensive IMO for what it is. Not that its over-priced, but being that 4K projectors are out and about now, I was looking more or less to get a fairly decent (maybe not the greatest) 1080 projector to hold me off until used 4K projectors become more of a norm.


The Qualia is a phenomenal projector, and different from the VW200 in multiple ways. Neither is overall "better" than the other, it just depends on your application. The VW200 would never light up a scope screen as large as you want, so the Qualia sounds like a perfect choice. For the money, it throws a phenomenal image. Given how well it was built, I'm sure it will last for as long as you want to keep it.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2014 2:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HogPilot wrote:
Given how well it was built, I'm sure it will last for as long as you want to keep it.


Well... I agree, but have to disagree, since I have to now send the board that commonly fails on this projector to Curt. I just emailed him tonight about it. It still works, but it's intermittent for power on, and I don't want to make it worse, so off the board goes to Curt.

Other than that though, I do believe it will outlast many other digital PJs. So far the power issue is the only failure I've ever seen on a Qualia.

What a bummer though! I was hoping to watch a movie on it tonight Sad

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2014 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeremy112 wrote:
HogPilot wrote:
Given how well it was built, I'm sure it will last for as long as you want to keep it.


Well... I agree, but have to disagree, since I have to now send the board that commonly fails on this projector to Curt. I just emailed him tonight about it. It still works, but it's intermittent for power on, and I don't want to make it worse, so off the board goes to Curt.

Other than that though, I do believe it will outlast many other digital PJs. So far the power issue is the only failure I've ever seen on a Qualia.

What a bummer though! I was hoping to watch a movie on it tonight Sad


Hey, at least you have the option of sending the board to Curt for repairs. That's almost unheard of for a digital projector - you're lucky that Curt decided to start tinkering with the Qualias and can offer you a fix other than the exorbitant price of replacing it with a new board that will likely eventually fail from the same problem Smile

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Jeremy112



Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2643
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HogPilot wrote:

Hey, at least you have the option of sending the board to Curt for repairs. That's almost unheard of for a digital projector - you're lucky that Curt decided to start tinkering with the Qualias and can offer you a fix other than the exorbitant price of replacing it with a new board that will likely eventually fail from the same problem Smile


Very true, and to be honest, I don't want to mess with repairing my own projector, so I am very happy that Curt is able to do it. I have enough stuff to repair without worrying about my own Laughing

I can hardly wait to get it repaired though, I am thinking about getting an anamorphic lens for it before I buy the video processor, mainly to get the projector ready to go for the new theater. The Video processor is after that though.

I don't suppose you could recommend a decent lens (new or used, used would be preferred for price reasons, I know they can get expensive quick). I'd like to get one on a motorized sled as well.

Also, would the Qualia be compatible with passive (real 3D type) 3D? 3D is not important, but would be nice to know if its doable.

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
HogPilot



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2014 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeremy112 wrote:
I can hardly wait to get it repaired though, I am thinking about getting an anamorphic lens for it before I buy the video processor, mainly to get the projector ready to go for the new theater. The Video processor is after that though.

I don't suppose you could recommend a decent lens (new or used, used would be preferred for price reasons, I know they can get expensive quick). I'd like to get one on a motorized sled as well.


I've owned/used the Panamorph UH380, UH480, and Isco 3 anamorphic lenses, and I was really happy with all 3. It seems that used UH480's are going for between $1K-$1.4K (potentially with or without a sled). Apparently the price of the Isco 3 has dropped significantly because most UHD consumer projectors (i.e. Sony, the only name in that game right now) are true 4K (4096x2160), which only requires a 1.25:1 horizontal stretch to attain a scope picture. Digital Cinema lenses are made in this AR, which means they're ridiculously expensive, but because the 1.33:1 Isco 3 doesn't work with these projectors, it has plummeted in price. I saw one sell on AVS with a sled for only $2800 recently. I sold just my lens for about $2K.

For at 16:9 HD projector, the Isco 3 is unbeatable considering what you can obtain a used one for. It will give you variably adjustable astigmatism focus, so it will work in a huge variety of throws. The UH480, on the other hand, has no adjustable focus, and is optimized for a certain throw range. As long as you use it in that range, I honestly think it will give you between 80% - 90% of the Isco 3 performance for a lot less money (that's based on my personal experience doing a side-by-side comparison with an RS35). Of course with the superb optics and sharpness on your Qualia, you could probably notice a difference in sharpness between the UH480 and the Isco 3. I'd say if you can stretch your budget to get the Isco, it's a perfect lens to pair with the Qualia. If you want to spend that money elsewhere, the UH480 is a really great 2nd choice at half the price.

As far as the sled goes - and this is just my personal preference - I skipped it and left the lens in the path for all ARs, and then used my Lumagen to scale the image to properly set the AR on the screen. There are numerous upsides to this as compared to moving the lens in and out of the light path with a sled. With the lens always in place, all ARs are displayed at equal brightness (no separate calibration required for lens in/lens out), and all ARs have equal pixel density (this means you'll have a single optimal seating distance for all ARs, which is not the case if you're moving the lens with a sled). All ARs will be scaled to completely fill the height of your screen, reducing the size of the pillarbox bars on the side - this is important for the very common 1.85:1 AR, and some of the oddball stuff like 2.0:1 that was used for movies like 2001: A Space Odyssey. If you only use the lens for 'scope material, you'll actually have black bars at the top and bottom of your screen for any AR between 16:9 and scope, which in my mind defeats the purpose of having a CIH setup. Also - and this is purely a convenience thing - all AR changes happen with the push of a single button on your VP remote.

The downside to leaving the lens in the light path is that you're always applying scaling to an image, and I know there are purists out there who would insist that scaling ruins the picture. I don't agree with that, because any of those arguments that I've seen are based on artificial test patterns expecting a scaling algorithm to work at above Nyquist frequency, which simply doesn't happen in real-world material. Also, it seems rather silly to argue that scaling is acceptable/required for scope material to get the best possible image, but it's somehow unacceptable for smaller ARs. The Lumagen's scaling is second-to-none (unless you have access to ridiculously expensive broadcast-grade or post-production video processing equipment), and it always did a phenomenal job of scaling an image without producing visible artifacts. I'm certainly not saying you should avoid a sled, but rather that there are other alternatives that (IMO) can yield an overall better presentation for non-scope, non-16:9 ARs while avoiding the cost of a sled(since you're already going to be getting a Lumagen VP).

Jeremy112 wrote:
Also, would the Qualia be compatible with passive (real 3D type) 3D? 3D is not important, but would be nice to know if its doable.


I don't know how LCoS does with passive 3D setups because of how the light is polarized in the light engine - using a polarizing filter on top of that for 3D may have some nasty side effects. I'd have to do some digging around on AVS to answer that question.

Here's another Qualia for sale on AVS for a pretty reasonable price:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/252-front-projector/1790082-sale-sony-qualia-004-many-extras.html

If you did an anamorphic setup, you'd have to get 2 lenses unless you were planning on going lensless for the 3D. That would be some serious gear, and a lot of work to get set up and properly aligned Smile

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly view    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> Digital Projectors All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  
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