| Author |
Message |
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:40 pm Post subject: zaggies |
|
|
Hi I am having this strange problem for a long time now. Zaggies horizontal. It only happens at 72Hz. It is not on the internal patterns.
This is with another vim and moome. Seems the same with warmup it becomes a little less.
I tried different timings and calculated enough sync width (1 us) and that did not solve it too. All timings according to Scott.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So what can this be.
Not internal so no hdm or clm
No moome or vim
No timings
internal:
Scot timings with 1us horizontal sync perhaps a little less?
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even smaller zaggies with the oppo and the hdfury for 72hz. Think it has something to do with hdmi bandwidth of moome.
Am I the only one? Hard to believe.
But anyway why bother with invisible stuff in your seat 
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Last edited by redfox001 on Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:56 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gasser
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:11 am Post subject: Redfox1 |
|
|
Why is there a bigger blue line outline? The blue color grid is wider.
I thought the 909 had what I would call "tighter" focus where there would be equal
line focus width, no bleedover, all lines tightly focused overlap.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElTopo
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1640
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess Blue is defocused for more light output and color tracking ?!
_________________
Barco Cine 9 the one and only
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElTopo
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1640
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nash,
but that's not the rez going to each Marquee ?
_________________
Barco Cine 9 the one and only
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:00 am Post subject: Re: Redfox1 |
|
|
| gasser wrote: | Why is there a bigger blue line outline? The blue color grid is wider.
I thought the 909 had what I would call "tighter" focus where there would be equal
line focus width, no bleedover, all lines tightly focused overlap. |
No no this is my modified Marquee 9500. The blue is indeed pretty wide but that is because the blue gamma chip is modded away from the vim. that is because they say the gamma is more linear now in the higher ire so better gamma but i have to defocus a lot to get the gamma straight. So my opinion is that that gamma chip should go back but I have not tried it yet. On the other hand it is not visible from the seat and does nothing about sharpness while leaving blue focussed (gamma bump) you get a huge blue hump on scenes and skin looks like people are not getting oxygen
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nashou66 wrote: | You need to increase Sync timing, more than 1us , Keep adding more sync pixels till it goes away.
Here is my blend timings.
Nashou |
That makes sense I will try that thanks! Scott also mentioned how big the porches needed to be but I feel that adds to much on bandwidth and I prefer a little ringing to the left. These where the timings I calculated for 1080p@72 perhaps someone can use them.
For 1920x817 72Hz:
Keep vertical blanking about 5% of the frame time.
1/72Hz = 13.9ms
13.9ms x 0.05 = 700us
So that leaves 95% of the frame time to display 817 lines.
1/72Hz x 0.95 = 13.2ms
13.2ms/817 lines = 16.15us for each displayed line. Horizontal frequency will be 1/16.15us or 61.92KHz.
For 1080p@72:
13.2ms/1080 = 12.2us voor 1 lijn -> 81,96KHz
Allow 20 to 25% of the line time for horizontal blanking. Analog (CRT) displays need their retrace time.
So, 16.15us x 0.25 = 4.04us or 16.15us x 0.2 = 3.23us
12.2 x 0.25 = 3.05us or for 20% 2.44us blanking
With 20% blanking there is 12.92us to display 1920 pixels. The pixel time is 6.73ns. 1/6.73ns means pixel clock is 148.6MHz.
For 1080p@72
12.2us - 2.44us = 9.76us 1920 pixels -> 5.08ns 196.8MHz
So I am getting to 196MHz bandwidth with correct blanking and 81KHz horizontal frequency
Now calculating the sync width:
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Last edited by redfox001 on Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:30 am; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Use about 5% of frame time for v blanking so 817 lines are 95% of the total lines or (817/0.95)x1 = 860 total lines.
For 1080p@72:
1080/0.95=1137 lines
Use 20% of the total line time for h blanking so 1920 pixels are 80% of the total pixels or (1920/0.8)x1 = 2400 total pixels.
V blanking is 860 total lines - 817 displayed lines or 43 lines.
1137-1080=57
H blanking is 2400 total pixels - 1920 displayed pixels or 480 pixels.
25% of blanking time for front porch gives:
0.25 x 43 lines = 10.75 round up or down to 10 or 11 lines. 14
0.25 x 480 pixels = 120 pixels.
25% of blanking time for sync gives:
10 or 11 lines for v sync. 14
120 pixels for h sync.
Use the rest of blanking for back porch:
43 lines - (fp + vs) = bp 57-14-14=29
480 pixels - (fp + hs) = bp 240
Now, there might be limitations on minimum h sync width like with Marquee projector. H sync minimum width is 1us. The above example will give h sync time = 808ns. Not ideal.
(1/72)/860 = total line time = 16.15us 12.86us
16.15us x 0.2 = 3.23us ( h blank time) 2.57us
3.23us/480 pixels = 6.73ns 2.57/480=5.35ns 1us/5.35ns=187 pixels sync width
1us/6.73ns = 148.6 pixels. 148 pixels is close enough. Split the remaining h blank pixels between fp and bp. Keep blanking pixels at 480 = fp +hs + bp.
For 1080p@72 I need 187 pixels sync width to get 1us sync time
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Last edited by redfox001 on Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:51 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is easier to use the Nash tool
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Decibel
Joined: 31 May 2007
Posts: 904
Location: Roma - Italia
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Where is this tool? Is possible to download it?
_________________
Domenico (Barco fan!)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2016 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do not have it and I would like to have it too.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Decibel
Joined: 31 May 2007
Posts: 904
Location: Roma - Italia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
thank you 
_________________
Domenico (Barco fan!)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
