|
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 |
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | There is a Chinese member on this forum that did some Barco 808 neck board mods recently that proves without question that the tubes are not what holds the 8 series Barco back from FHD, and with the said mods done to an 812, it could easily be a whole lot more capable. |
This doesn't surprise me at all. Going clear back to when i had my old (clean, low-hour) 1271… It wasn't electronics or even the ES-focusing tubes that held that machine back. 1080i scan lines were easily visible on the tube face, and were even visible looking into the lenses with sunglasses. When I say "visible", I mean very easy to see, and surprisingly sharp. However, those same scan lines were never visible on-screen no matter what amount of tweaking with mechanical focus I did. By that metric alone, I'd say that machine was capable of nearly four times the resolution of the plastic HD-8 lenses, i.e. something below 960x540 (or 1024x768 at 4:3). I also tested the Sony lenses that people said were sharper (don't recall the model - HACC whatever?), and if they were any better, I couldn't detect it.
None of this should be surprising, since machines like the 1271 were designed when 480i, VGA, and SVGA were the most common computer resolutions. So, it wouldn't have made sense to put higher-resolution lenses - which have been extremely expensive - into those machines. Enter graphics-grade projectors like the BG 808s. Still, it wouldn't surprise me if even the lenses like the HD-144/145 were still not below what the projector was capable of.
Back to the 812… It was no doubt very expensive, due in no small part to the lenses alone. Big, huge pieces of glass aren't cheap - especially in low volumes. Look at the price of telescopes and good camera lenses for some indication of large projection lenses.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
The 808s has HD-8 lenses on it i think. The XGs have HD-144/145, mine had 144s and i got scanlines easily visible at 1080i, so if the 808 uses those then that isnt whats holding it back.
_________________
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 |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can say for sure though Crabb, i did test HD-6 lenses on a VPH1001 in place of TAC4, and when defocused electronically to get phosphor grain there was a certain improvement, but no improvement noticable at 576i, the TAC4 were good enough for the job there.
_________________
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 |
|
|
jask
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 10187
Location: kamloops BC
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | The 808s has HD-8 lenses on it i think. The XGs have HD-144/145, mine had 144s and i got scanlines easily visible at 1080i, so if the 808 uses those then that isnt whats holding it back. |
I agree, the PG was capable of crisp HD with sharp scanlines. Other than a few well known lens swaps all the "hotrodding" in these machines has been electronics. What is impressive to me is how much headroom was designed into the systems by some of the manufacturers considering that they knew how few end users would come close to needing the full potential.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
The PG was indeed, although with HD-6 it wasnt as sharp in the corners on on edges
_________________
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 |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree the HD-6 lens isn't as sharp as the 144/145 lens(my dwin has the 145's)
I even did a comparison and the 145's was sharper(keep in mind this was done on a Ecp not my dwin)
Same can be said for the marquee or nec sets(currently have the gt16's on my quee)
Now I have three sets of HD-10L lens(not sure what to do with them)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I found that 808 necboard mod. Very impressive. Sometimes I think perhaps the single ended solution has a few advantages in the blacks. I read that MP did do some mods to make the push pull more linear near black and that brought out better black details. Think the Barco single ended solution might be an advantage there. Only thing I can say black look very very black here 
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=34134.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RaWsHaRk
Joined: 01 May 2009
Posts: 131
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | There is a Chinese member on this forum that did some Barco 808 neck board mods recently that proves without question that the tubes are not what holds the 8 series Barco back from FHD, and with the said mods done to an 812, it could easily be a whole lot more capable. |
I'd say that machine was capable of nearly four times the resolution of the plastic HD-8 lenses, i.e. something below 960x540 (or 1024x768 at 4:3). I also tested the Sony lenses that people said were sharper (don't recall the model - HACC whatever?), and if they were any better, I couldn't detect it.
|
PT-65. theyre a little bit sharper than HD8 but not enough difference to start hunting for them. got some with a 1252 i bought a couple years ago.
the lenses in my D50, HD6 HACC, also do a better job than HD8 that I tried but need adapters to put in 808 etc- they also look a lot cooler on the outside--
_________________
Electrohome Marquee 7500.
|
|
| 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
|
|
