|
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 |
fragzero
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Where did you find 9" guns have a bigger spotsize?
I thought there were 2 spotsizes in EM focused tubes and 3 kinds of guns.
Standard Spotsize
180d.. 8"
LCP 9"
and maybe others
Small Spotsize
P16 PT18 8"
PT22
and maybe others
Small Spotsize with an additonal grid
Eisemann simulation grade 8" tubes (not certain, never seen one)
Lugs and the sony equivalent
This is something i gathered from the web so i might be mistaken!
Also i have measured the 19ftL myself so i'm quite confident about this.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Erm??? Its obvious? 
The tube face is larger, there is more phosphor, the image on the face is larger, yet the same on the screen. More phosphor is being lit up, hence more brightness.
Im not questioning what you measured, but did you take a measurement from a top end 9" machine set up the same way on the same screen?
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fragzero
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: |
The tube face is larger, there is more phosphor, the image on the face is larger, yet the same on the screen. More phosphor is being lit up, hence more brightness.
|
Well yes but if the guns are the same (which is what i still assume) there is less time for the same gun to activate the same area of phosphor (since it has to handle a longer piece of phospor going left to right (or the other way around, no idea))
Edit: It's only a matter of time before one of the experts drops in and tells us we are both wrong 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ive got no idea where your theory comes in...
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fragzero
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
We are ruining this thread
Anyway
Suppose: (figures are examples and totally not real)
8" has a width of 10 centimeters and the gun has 1 second to make an entire pass. (1 line)
9" has a width of 15 centimeters and the gun has 1 second to make an entire pass. (1 line)
So on the 8" the gun has more time on 1 spot since it has to handle a little less surface - more time = more energy transferred = brighter phosphor. (depending on how the phosphor behaves at different energylevels)
Offcourse this also means more phosphor aging etc which is why is probably why a 9" is preferable when running high ftL on a big screen (more phosphor used = less aging).
And what effect does glycol + C-element and more complex 9" lenses have on the brightness, maybe they also cause a reduction in brightness.
But really i have no idea how this exactly works so i can only can only speculate. I'd love to have the technical explanation of one of the more technical members here!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I measured 18fl on my 8500AC, don remember the contrast setting, but quite sure it was not at max. with HD 8 lenses, and no color corection. Missing color corection is one thing, i suspect the lenses also helps keeping light output high.
I can not pass 12 fl on a 9500LC without terible blooming, on a standard machine.
But i have made 16fl on my 9500LC with the MP mods. All with LCP tubes and HD10 E lenses
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | Never, i dont generally bother comparing low-mid range projectors with high end units.
But id expect considering how good you claim they are they wouldnt suffer blooming so easily.
Im really quite amazed you think the 8" tubes in AC housings would push out the same or more light than the 9" tubes in LC housings, let alone with less effort. |
There is a perfectly good reason why we bother modding the Marquee.. 
About the light, its not something i THINK.. I actualy bother to compare, setup and measure the result.
For me it works better that way instead of claiming something i dont have any hands on experience with.
Remember im only refering to the Marquee machines here, in standard condition.
Ill not coment on Barco NEC or other i never put my hands on. That will just result in speculations and its not usefull for anyone.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes.... You mod those things cause they NEED it to be up where NEC automatically were right out of the shipping crate
Stridsvognen, you also laid claim some months ago that your 8500 AC had a contrast ratio damn near the same as your 9500 LC, so if thats what you got, there is either something wrong with your measurements, your 9500 LC, or both.
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fragzero
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: |
12 fl on a 9500LC
16fl on my 9500LC with the MP mods |
Wow not bad!
At the topicstarter.
Have you experimented with the scheimfplug adjustments? And maybe astig isn't 100%?
I spend the weekend before Christmas tinkering with my scheimfplug and astig and made huge improvements on overall sharpness!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | Yes.... You mod those things cause they NEED it to be up where NEC automatically were right out of the shipping crate
Stridsvognen, you also laid claim some months ago that your 8500 AC had a contrast ratio damn near the same as your 9500 LC, so if thats what you got, there is either something wrong with your measurements, your 9500 LC, or both. |
You very well know that was no reference measurements, and a poor room for ansi contrast, that was more about documenting a improvement with my 16:9 masking of the AC tubes.
And the masking of the tube face not involved in creating the picture reduced the measured max output with about 0,7fl if i dont remember all wrong. I think that speaks all for itself.
I was going to folow up on that once i get the projectors into a totally controlled room, and can do a more correct measurement, but nobody seemed to care, or prefered to misunderstand my intentions, so ill just share those experiments with those i talk to, to avoid anoying the same persons that dont care about the Marquee 8500AC machine and what can be done to improve ansi contrast.
So my measurements were close, but not usefull for claiming whos best, and i never did so.
The halo thing on AC effects ansi a lot on movie material, but not really that much when using a ansi pattern, so as always measuring testpatterns dont tell all there is to a complex image. Measuring testpatterns are usually very very low resolution patterns or windows.
Its a bit the way bandwidth have a lot of importance on high resolution content, the same i find with AC halo. It have more impact on higher resolution area of the image.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fragzero wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
12 fl on a 9500LC
16fl on my 9500LC with the MP mods |
Wow not bad!
At the topicstarter.
Have you experimented with the scheimfplug adjustments? And maybe astig isn't 100%?
I spend the weekend before Christmas tinkering with my scheimfplug and astig and made huge improvements on overall sharpness! |
I know the adjustments have huge impacts on sharpness, standard the Marquee is to be honest quite hard to get a good focus on.
But MP makes miracles cleaning up the noise in the video chain, so the focus system dont need to work so hard.
I think there can be many reasons to poor sharpness in a 9500LC, one is the fact you need to push contrast higher to get the same light output. Another thing is that Marquee machines seems to perform very different, so just putting the ground strap on the rear bords might do miracles on some, and guess tubes and old electronics can behave very different to.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fragzero
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd still love to get my hands on a marquee but no luck so far
Just trying to help the TS! I'd start by getting scheimfplug and then astig perfect!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the thread starter could post some good screenshots showing whats going on, then we might get a idea if its normal, or something wrong with this specifik projector.
Like its a Marquee with mods and not standard tubes, there might be many places to look for the problem.
I also got the idea that the screen is much to big to a single CRT for a decent light output.
I think around 2-2,4m wide fits for my Marquee machines, 2,4m wide i realy push the marquee hard to get a decent lightoutput and keep a fair sharpness.
So if i calculate right the used screen is around 2,75m wide and im sure a 8500AC will lit up that screan better than a 9500LC with the same contrast setting.
So tell us your projector settings, and measured light on screen, that might give a hint if its pushed over its comfort level.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So... Why did they use 12" tubes in a few sets???? Higher brightness from larger tube face...
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | So... Why did they use 12" tubes in a few sets???? Higher brightness from larger tube face... |
What 12" tubes have you tested.? And how did they perform.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | The halo thing on AC effects ansi a lot on movie material, but not really that much when using a ansi pattern, so as always measuring testpatterns dont tell all there is to a complex image. |
Ummm... AC halo acutely affects ANSI contrast, and that is most certainly revealed with the ANSI pattern. That's the whole POINT of the ANSI checkerboard!
However, if you're evaluating ANSI in a room with lots of white walls and a low-gain (matte) screen, the room will have a similarly deleterious effect on ANSI contrast as air-coupling. The net effect will be a narrowing of the gap between two projectors which otherwise should show a significant difference in contrast ratio. I think this is what we determined was the probable cause for your observations in that other thread some time ago.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | The halo thing on AC effects ansi a lot on movie material, but not really that much when using a ansi pattern, so as always measuring testpatterns dont tell all there is to a complex image. |
Ummm... AC halo acutely affects ANSI contrast, and that is most certainly revealed with the ANSI pattern. That's the whole POINT of the ANSI checkerboard!
However, if you're evaluating ANSI in a room with lots of white walls and a low-gain (matte) screen, the room will have a similarly deleterious effect on ANSI contrast as air-coupling. The net effect will be a narrowing of the gap between two projectors which otherwise should show a significant difference in contrast ratio. I think this is what we determined was the probable cause for your observations in that other thread some time ago.
SC |
Thanks for reminding me what i wrote a few hours ago. And for your understanding what that stunt was all about.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | ecrabb wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | The halo thing on AC effects ansi a lot on movie material, but not really that much when using a ansi pattern, so as always measuring testpatterns dont tell all there is to a complex image. |
Ummm... AC halo acutely affects ANSI contrast, and that is most certainly revealed with the ANSI pattern. That's the whole POINT of the ANSI checkerboard!
However, if you're evaluating ANSI in a room with lots of white walls and a low-gain (matte) screen, the room will have a similarly deleterious effect on ANSI contrast as air-coupling. The net effect will be a narrowing of the gap between two projectors which otherwise should show a significant difference in contrast ratio. I think this is what we determined was the probable cause for your observations in that other thread some time ago.
SC |
Thanks for reminding me what i wrote a few hours ago. And for your understanding what that stunt was all about. |
| stridsvognen wrote: | | CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | So... Why did they use 12" tubes in a few sets???? Higher brightness from larger tube face... |
What 12" tubes have you tested.? And how did they perform.? |
Sony PVM? Well it was a 13" but 12" viewable. Performance was quite incredible really.
As for a serious answer, you dont honestly think an 8" tube is brighter than a simular type 9" tube do you? The whole idea of the larger tube face is more light output. The 12" tubes were used for more light output again.
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: |
As for a serious answer, you dont honestly think an 8" tube is brighter than a simular type 9" tube do you? The whole idea of the larger tube face is more light output. The 12" tubes were used for more light output again. |
We are not talking tubes, im just stating what i experienced with a standard Marquee 8500AC VS 9500LC
They have the same chassis and video chain, the difference is tubes, chamber, and lenses.
I cant say what do what, but the 8500AC is brighter when adjusted to the point right before blooming.
There is less ansi contrast, less dynamic range in the image and so on with the AC machine, but measuring a 100% IRE window, the AC is brighter. Thats a fact on my machines.
I prefer the LC any day, but thats another matter.
If this argue have to make any sense we need to talk about the same thing.. the measured end result on the screen.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The reason might be Kurt because the 9 inch set you have has red and green c elements where the ac is clear. so there might be
a possibility that your sets behave that way due the fact that the red and green are outputting a little less light due to the colored C's.
'On my Ac vs LC the LC was brighter but i had red and green Hd 144's. As for the sharpness the * inch did seam sharper. Why? I have no idea as the HD 10E's are the sharpest of all the HD 10's I have and I have a set of each, well did, I sold the GT 17's.
Nashou
_________________
Don't blame your underwear for your crooked ass~ unknown Greek philosopher
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." --- President Reagan
One Smart Dog!!!
Marquee High Performance Bellows now shipping!!
Marquee Modifications and Performance Enhancement
Marquee C-element and Bellow removal
|
|
| 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
|
|
