|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mc86 wrote: | Tim -
Was the decision to support 16:9 at full tube face height and thereby letterboxing 2.4 made b/c you wanted the widest screen you could have for the most content AR you watch? If so, I can totally understand that.
Also Tim, I presume the phosphor area that is in the blend area wears more slowly than the other areas? Does this mean the color calibration will change differently over time for the blend zone compared to the other tube areas? I recall Nashou wished for color-calibration of the blend zone differently from the rest of the tube face and am thnking this was why...
For others, the math that Spanky was doing was to say the blend makes more sense for a 2.4:1 AR, with all phosphor use and not 85% as in Tim's case.
(4:3 native) 1.33 x 2 = 2.66.
2.6 - 2.4 = 0.26.
0.26/2.4 = ~10% blend.
1.78 (16:9) would use constant image height (CIH)/phosphor height and just pillarbox 16:9 (1.78) content.
Big E: For a 7"ES machine owner, who watches mostly film (scope stuff) mixed with 4:3 from crappy HTPC (bewitched is fine in 4:3), there is another - and unique - reason I'm considering a blend. In addition to the increased brightness that enables larger screens, two 7" machines in a blend would also extend my resolution capabilities. 8" and 9" machine owners don't care about this as 1080p is no sweat. However, a 7"ES machine is only OK 1080i or awfully soft 720p. It can't handle 1080p at all. By blending, I'd be able to support (and resolve) a sharp 1920x800p (via "active area scanning") image. This is because I'd be using a ton more phosphor (tube face in height) than the soft 720p does without a blend OR about same as 540 lines scanned into a small part of the tube face under 1080i.
Matt |
I see I am getting a 9inch set till I can get a second Ecp for the blend setup(and the other needed stuff)
Ps I am running 720p with no issue(nor is the picture soft)I may try 1080i sometime as I am tring out different settings(except 1080p even though the set can lock on to it)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Definitely try 1080i. Though others said exactly the opposite, I always much preferred 1080i to 720p on my 8'ish-inch ES CRT. Sort of "over-sampled". I liked the increased spacial resolution and the smoother film playback. 1080i felt much more like watching film to me than did 720p.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Wed May 22, 2013 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | Definitely try 1080i. Though others said exactly the opposite, I always much preferred 1080i to 720p on my 8'ish-inch ES CRT. Sort of "over-sampled". I liked the increased spacial resolution and the smoother film playback. 1080i felt much more like watching film to me than did 720p.
SC |
I will give it a try and see (been running 720p mostly) but I can run 1080p and it looks good(I have only tried it on my ps3 so far)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
