| Author |
Message |
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is a no-glasses 3D display method using collimated optics. I've seen it in a demonstration. It was extremely good.
The projectors used were CRT projectors. But I don't know the optical design of the system other than what was advertised
which is that it used collimated optics.
| Quote: | | If you absolutely *must* have exactly 1080p at all costs, you need to look at a digital |
This is absolute nonsense. Many CRT projectors were capable of 1080p before HD even existed as a standard for consumers.
Heck, many CRT projectors that have 1080p capability were DISCONTINUED before 1080p even existed in the consumer market!
When I do a complete setup and calibration on a 9500LC, I do the last run at 2048x1536, compressed into a 16x9 active area, which is
equal in pixel density to 2048x2048 in 4x3 mode. If it is a well modded projector, it really comes close to being able to resolve THAT
resolution. (Frankenyoke Mark IIs, MP mods, focus mods, a few other tweaks here and there.)
Digitals have come a long way but they're still not equal to the best CRT units.
CJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheVerge
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 928
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | Refresh rate has nothing to do with it, TheVerge.
|
I was reading somewhere that one of the big companies was taking an approach similar to this, by alternating the images at a super high refresh rate, and letting the brain interpret that as a 3d image. I cannot readily find said article though.
Seems to me like it would just make you dizzy or look like a ghost but what do i know.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think I heard about that one. I'm pretty sure two views alternated at super-high refresh would just all blend together into a big, blurry mess.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheVerge
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 928
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | I don't think I heard about that one. I'm pretty sure two views alternated at super-high refresh would just all blend together into a big, blurry mess.
SC |
Like an airplane propeller... Perhaps the person writing this article didn't understand the subject, but that was the claim.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheVerge wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Just think.. it's the next excuse to tell everyone that their current 1080p displays are obsolete, and that they need to upgrade. |
I was thinking the same thing the other day... This 3d stuff is out of control with consumer sets, and there is nothing to watch on them.
Not to mention, the only 3d glasses i can find are 500 bones.... OUCH ! |
I had to laugh when I read Curt's comment. That is how I felt at Cedia. It almost felt like making better 1080p displays is now passe(?). Panny had the best 3d demo with their big plasma, but the rest left something to be desired. The projector based 3d made me dizzy. I think there is potential, but wouldn't it be better to increase display and source performance?
As for Avatar, I haven't seen it. Atlanta has a regular Imax and a digital Imax, so I will probably check t out on one of those. Em, look to see if Philly has a digital Imax close to you. I personally wasn't a fan of the digital Imax in Miami, but for 3d it might work well. They use two pjs and according to Darinp2 it didn't suffer from lack of brightness.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paw
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1176
Location: Arvada, CO
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garyfritz wrote: | | emdawgz1 wrote: | | I saw the 2 Toy stories in 3d.... I'm not impressed... It distracts from the film. |
Glad I'm not the only one. The only recent 3D film I've seen was Monsters vs. Aliens. The 3D was at best a dopey gimmick, and at worst a serious distraction from enjoying the film. I just don't get the attraction. |
I the 2 Toy Stories. I thought it was one of the better 3D presentations. They mainly focused the 3D effects to give the film depth. Not the usually crap of things jumping off the screen at you.
_________________
Aubrey
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incova
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 789
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: 3d |
|
|
I saw Avatar in 3d and it was amazing the audience just went silent it was totally immersive as soon as i saw it I thought I have to see if the 4600 can do this! I have a feeling its going to be a blend situation though for our crt pjs. I have been running through a few scenarios just to see where to go I will post some links I have later. Didnt you guys have your Superbowl in some form of 3d with a blue and brown lens glasses given out?
_________________
The more I learn
the less I know.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Berezin.com sells the blue/amber glasses that are required to view the sort of 3D commercial that was in the 2009 Superbowl.
They also sell every other kind of 3D glasses and related polarized products under the sun, including polarizers for use with large projectors.
CJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That was the ColorCode 3-D system that was used in the SuperBowl Monsters vs. Aliens short promo, and in an episode of the show Chuck the next night.
I missed the Monster vs Aliens promo, but saw the Chuck episode, and ended up taking the glasses off half way through; it was just annoying. I hate the impact on color, contrary to the ColorCode marketing BS. It may be an improvement over red/blue anaglyph, but I would say negligible at best.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I wonder if 3d breaks down along age lines. I will hopefully see it at the Imax sometime this week.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't seem like it, Spanky. At least, I haven't noticed an age correlation... For instance, my old man saw Avatar in 3D a couple weeks ago and said it was super-cool.
Personally, I really like 3D... I just don't want it to take away from the experience - it should add something, not take something away. The colored glasses just suck, whether it's the red/blue anaglyph or the newfangled blue/brown.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jradwanski
Joined: 31 Aug 2009
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I would like to try 3d projection,but wat do i need to do polarised 3d projection? I have two projectors bolth are crt same type. I know i need filters and glasses. is there anything else i need?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
betel
Joined: 20 Apr 2006
Posts: 448
Location: Maryville, Tennessee (Just South of Knoxville)
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3D reminds me of early 2 channels audio. Originally different instruments played out of each speaker, producing an interesting effect but hardly a realistic soundstage. I think 3D will evolve in the same way. That is to produce a more realistic image instead of things jumping out of the screen.
I saw Disney's "Christmas Carol" and was impressed with it even though the brightness was too low. Part of the problem was the polarized glasses they gave me. Mine were significantly scratched which didn't help with the brightness. Probably worth it to purchase a higher quality set.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RVonse
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 3152
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | CJ,
| Quote: | | Moreover, the specification is display agnostic, meaning that Blu-ray 3D products will deliver the 3D image to any compatible 3D display, regardless of whether that display uses LCD, Plasma or other technology and regardless of what 3D technology the display uses to deliver the image to the viewer's eyes. |
It's interesting that they go out of their way to point out that it is display agnostic, but if you read it closely, it's only display agnostic on any compatible 3D display. Nobody knows what "compatible" is at this point.
I'll be very interested to see the details on the spec when it's released.
See the other thread about this, too:
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=19299.html
SC |
If I was to do 3d on crt projectors I would never consider shutter glasses. The right way to do it would be exactly like the film theaters did with Avator. Use 2 projectors, 1 vertically polarized and the other horizontally polorized. Brightness would probably be close to what it would otherwise be with 1 projector and no glasses.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnalogRocks
Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 26706
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TV/Projector: Sony 1252Q, AMPRO 4000G
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SO a 3D addition to the stack
_________________
Tech support for nothing
CRT.
HD done right!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
A second projector is completely impractical for many people, myself included. I'd gladly accept shutter glasses but would want the frame
rate to be high enough to eliminate flicker.
Even at the theater where I saw Avatar, the 3D version had some noticeable strobing during rapid motion sequences. I'd want the
home theater version to be no worse.
CJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bbfarmht
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Where the Mississippi runs east to west!!
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Reading a little on the 3d subject you could do it without shutter glasses and without stacking. You would however need to put a filter in front of your lenses.
_________________
Adam
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"
Benjamin Franklin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, Adam... If you're going to filter (polarize) the projector (that's called passive stereo), then you need to stack, because you need a projector for each view.
The only way you can do stereo with on projector is active stereo (with emitter and shutter glasses), and that's where we get into trouble with bandwidth and refresh rate issues.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bbfarmht
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 1273
Location: Where the Mississippi runs east to west!!
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | No, Adam... If you're going to filter (polarize) the projector (that's called passive stereo), then you need to stack, because you need a projector for each view.
The only way you can do stereo with on projector is active stereo (with emitter and shutter glasses), and that's where we get into trouble with bandwidth and refresh rate issues.
SC |
Guess i need to stop skimming over the info. Oh wait A.D.D. doesn't let me do that. DOH!!!! 
_________________
Adam
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"
Benjamin Franklin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bbfarmht wrote: | | Guess i need to stop skimming over the info. Oh wait A.D.D. doesn't let me do that. DOH!!!! |
I hear ya, man... I suffer from it, too. Focus, man! Focus!!!
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
