Blogs and stories

[boredjedi]

that. is. AWESOME. simply awesome.


now i want a theater room to watch all my john woo and sammo hung movies on

something to aim for when i grow up

And it's a 3d projector. I have a lot of 3d movies. Only wish Lazytown was done in 3d.

[chuft]

Home theater generally means a large screen and a surround sound speaker and receiver set, what BJ meant by "5.1" although I'm not sure why he said "I still only use 5.1 audio." 5.1 means there are 5 small speakers, usually on stands or mounted on the wall, generally one center, one on the right, one on the left, one behind you on the right, and one behind you on the left.

The .1 refers to a sixth large speaker that just does bass tones to make the room vibrate, called a subwoofer, which sits on the floor. The home theater receiver takes the 5.1 sound signal (which can come in several formats like Dolby Digital or DTS if I recall correctly) and outputs it to the speakers like it would in a real theater. So it's not stereo, there are five different sound channels in addition to the bass.






So if a plane was flying into the scene from behind the camera view, you would hear the sound first in the rear left speaker over your shoulder, then both rear left and front left, then center, then front right as it flew by. Directional sound. Some sound tracks also have an additional 2 directional channels so they are 7.1 but that's getting a little silly.

Directional sound generally only matters for action movies - a drama with lots of dialog doesn't benefit much from knowing the direction some offstage sound is coming from, because all the important sound is coming from the front speakers. Even stereo sound is fine for those.


The real key to viewing is the fact that the human eye has a relatively small arc in which it sees clearly and in color. Outside of that it's peripheral vision.

The high quality detailed area is only about 30 degrees wide. Hold out your arm, stare straight ahead, stick up a finger and move your arm slowly from in front of your face out to the sides until you can't see your finger any more. Somewhere along the way you just have a vague impression of something there but can't clearly see the finger.


That means in general, the screen size merely determines how far away the TV should be.

If you sit at a distance where the screen fills your 30 degree frontal view, then you will be able to see everything happening, but will also see stuff to the sides of the TV in your peripheral vision.

If you sit closer, so the TV is filling 40 degrees, then you cannot clearly see the entire screen at once, and will have to look to the sides of the screen to see things there clearly. But you won't see anything to the sides of the TV, the screen will completely fill your main viewing area. This makes it more immersive in that it feels more like you are in the movie, but just like real life, some stuff happening will be in your peripheral vision so you have to turn your eyes or head to see it, at which point stuff on the other side becomes even less clear.






For every screen size there's an ideal distance that makes it fill your field of vision to the extent you want. If you want it to completely fill your field of vision then you have to sit closer or get a bigger screen. But that will make things happening on the right and left edges of the screen hard to see unless you turn and look at them. If you want to comfortably see everything that's going on, like when watching sports (or see UI elements in a game that might be along the sides or in the corners) then you want it farther away, in the 30 degree area.


There is a mathematical formula to calculate this based on the screen size. This page has one as well as more pictures and explanations.


https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by...e-relationship


My TV was 50" so I set the couch and recliner 7 feet away from it. For BJ's screen you would have to sit much farther away and need a big room. But I want to see everything clearly without having to turn and look from one side to the other. For someone wanting to feel truly immersed (to the point stuff in the movie is in their peripheral vision and they can't see it without turning their head to look at that side) they would be closer, in my case 5 feet instead of 7. I don't particularly care for that, I prefer to easily be able to see most things at once. So I chose 7 feet.


Movie theaters tend to go for "immersive" and this is compounded by real wide aspect ratio movies - a typical movie aspect ratio is around 1.78 to 1, which is why most computer monitors are now too. But some films are wider, Apocalypse Now is 2.35:1 if I recall, really really wide relative to its height. In movies like this, in the theater, unless you sit way at the back, you can't see what's happening at the edges of the picture at all without turning to look at that side. But it completely takes up your field of vision which makes you feel more "in the movie".


In the old days most movies were shot in 4:3, so when TV came along, CRT TVs were made to the same ratio. Movie makers then had the problem that people didn't bother going to the theater because they could have the same experience at home watching TV. So they started making movies much wider so you could not view them on a home TV without having to edit the movie or pan from side to side so only a partial amount of the picture was visible at a time. A lot of VHS tapes of movies, made to be viewed on a 4:3 TV, had "pan and scan" edit where you could not see the whole picture, somebody edited the tape to shift the focus back and forth, say to whichever character was talking.

The alternative was "letterbox" where the whole width of the movie was shown, but a wide, short movie on a squarish tall screen means you have to put black bars on the top and bottom since the picture does not fill it, and you are not using the entire screen, and the movie looks small.

Nowadays we have the opposite problem if we want to watch old, 4:3 movies or TV shows on 16:9 screens, we have to put black bars on the sides instead. The alternative is stretching the picture horizontally to fill out the screen but that makes everyone look fat.


This vision cone principle is true regardless of whether you are watching it on a phone held in front of your face, a computer monitor which might be several feet away, or a giant TV across the room. All the size does is let you (force you really) place the screen farther away from the viewer. This is primarily useful if you want several (or more) people to be able to watch it at once and still get the theater experience.

When rich people with mansions talk about home theater they literally mean a dedicated room with rows of seats that could allow lots of people to sit in there and watch it.




But for most people it's a living room arrangement. The depth of the room and how far the seats can be from the wall will determine the max screen size you should get. If you're one of those people who sit on a couch against the back wall of a huge room with the TV against the opposite wall 20 feet away then you need a huge TV to be able to see it. If you move the furniture closer to the TV you can get a much smaller TV, but of course fewer seats/people will be able to sit in the magic area.

So it depends on how many people you want to be hosting for watching movies. For one or two people in a modest apartment, a 50" or so TV that is 7 feet away or some from the couch/chairs works quite well.

A lot of the push for huge screens is because of people with big living rooms who didn't want to have to put the seats in the middle of the room in order to be able to watch TV. They want the furniture along the back wall, so they need a huge screen to make up for how much farther the TV is if it, too, is set up along a wall (which TVs generally always are).

[boredjedi]

Good video showing how the micromirrors and the color wheel worked.

Came across another image I had taken. All those tiny squares are the Mirrors on the DMD Chip.
You have to get up really close to see them. Camera pic came out pretty good.




What the DMD chip looks like (in that color wheel video, he never did show the actual chip)
The silver looking area is all the teeny tiny mirrors.

[chuft]

He shows it at 0:10

[boredjedi]

I should have watched it again. Didn't remember the DMD chip in the video.

[chuft]

An article with animations

https://www.projectorscreen.com/blog...projector-work

I guess they are still being used for projectors. It's just the standalone DLP TV's that stopped being made.

Interesting thing is DLP uses a user-replaceable light bulb that you can change out if it dims over time.

The micromirror chip is interesting to me because unlike other chips, it has millions of moving parts. They are each moving with incredible speed and precision.

[boredjedi]

An article with animations

https://www.projectorscreen.com/blog...projector-work

I guess they are still being used for projectors. It's just the standalone DLP TV's that stopped being made.

Interesting thing is DLP uses a user-replaceable light bulb that you can change out if it dims over time.

The micromirror chip is interesting to me because unlike other chips, it has millions of moving parts. They are each moving with incredible speed and precision.

And the 4k DMD Chip is a little different in how it works compared to a 1080p DMD chip.
While the 1080p has around 2 million mirrors, you get a true 1080p. The 4k has around 4 million mirrors
not the necessary 8 million for the true 4k resolution. What they do is a thing called pixel shifting.

Still that's a lot of mirrors. I had to look up what the actual resolution of the 4k projectors
which is 2716x1528.

The 4K DLP chip starts with double the resolution of the 3LCD devices. It has a total of 2716x1528 mirrors. Through some proprietary video processing it is able to deliver two discrete pixels for each mirror. When using this chip in the pixel-shifting process, it delivers double the number of pixels in each refresh

https://www.projectorcentral.com/4k-dlp-projectors.htm


https://www.projectorreviews.com/ter...pr-technology/

But yeah, the DLP TV's were phased out. Due in part to the newer technology.
And most home theater enthusiast will still chose a project over anything else.
For that theater going experience. I know the bigger sets you could easily replace
the projector bulb. Not sure about those smaller ones.

The one downside to DLP that last time I was doing all this stuff is the contrast.
The problem lays in the substrate below the mirror. They can't get it to not
throw a little light out onto the screen. So it's not pure black. They need some
sort of black 100% light absorbing material.

Still the DLP is fascinating that it even works with million of mirror rocking back and forth.
And the technology behind it all how that rocking is achieved. At such a small scale, the speed and again the millions of mirrors.

[chuft]

And most home theater enthusiast will still chose a project over anything else.

You mean home theater enthusiasts with gigantic rooms and a screen on the wall...I highly doubt this is most people, although it may be most rich people. I won't describe your housing situation but we both know you have an unusually large amount of room. I would say the overwhelming number of people with 5.1 surround set up, use regular TVs not projectors.

The one downside to DLP that last time I was doing all this stuff is the contrast.
The problem lays in the substrate below the mirror. They can't get it to not
throw a little light out onto the screen. So it's not pure black. They need some
sort of black 100% light absorbing material.

You really mystify me with this one.

One of the main advantages of DLP is contrast and true blacks.

Higher Contrast Ratio: This is one of the most significant benefits of DLP projectors. Unlike LCD technology, DLP leads to the generation of true black and true white. So, you don't have to settle for varying shades of gray.

https://www.wemax.com/blogs/tutorial...he-differences

[boredjedi]

Well my projector is a very bright one so maybe that's the issue. I've discussed this before.
I should have stated Black levels rather than Contrast. There's also the perceived black levels
when the image is bright.

It could be a combo of

Light Leakage: In DLP projectors, even when the micromirrors are tilted to create a "black" pixel, a small amount of light can still leak through the optics and reach the screen. This light leakage prevents true blacks from being achieved, resulting in a grayscale appearance instead of a pure black

Substrate Reflectivity: The reflective substrate behind the micromirrors in the DLP chip can contribute to this light leakage. Even if the mirrors are tilted off, some light can bounce back from the substrate and degrade the black levels

Black level: Refers to the darkest shade of black a display can produce, while contrast ratio is the difference between the brightest white and the darkest black a display can achieve. Essentially, black level is a component of contrast ratio, with a lower black level contributing to a higher contrast ratio.

There's be been millions of projector threads about this issue. It's very noticeable on a 16:9 screen and you are projecting
a 2.39:1 movie (letter boxing). The above area of the screen and bottom area of the screen is a dark gray scale. There
are home theater guys that will make a strictly 2:39:1 screen due to that. I remember this guy made a motorized screen when
projecting a 2:39:1 movie would put into place a very black material like the black material you see around commercially produced
movie screens that would take care of that issue. Then retract it back for 16:9 content. Some just make dedicated 2:39:1 movie screen.
We are talking even the more expensive projectors. The real home theater enthusiast that will pay a couple of thousand on a projector.




I would say, going by memory, that with the projector on, projecting no image that would be the level
of "Black" or "Grayscale" you can see on the screen. It's definitely not pure black because I can
still see things in the room and walk around with no problem not bumping into things as I do
when I turn the projector off and the screen goes dark and so does the room. heh

[chuft]

Pure blacks was an advantage I read about when buying mine and I still read the same things today and it matches my experience. It is the best technology for true blacks that exists. Are you quoting from an AI?

The above area of the screen and bottom area of the screen is a dark gray scale. There are home theater guys that will make a strictly 2:39:1 screen due to that.

Maybe it's something that affects projectors - it certainly didn't affect my HDTV - but it still does not match articles about DLP and its advantages.

Substrate Reflectivity: The reflective substrate behind the micromirrors in the DLP chip can contribute to this light leakage. Even if the mirrors are tilted off, some light can bounce back from the substrate and degrade the black levels

If you watched that video I linked, an off micromirror is flat. Any light hitting it would reflect off at a 45 degree angle and hit the beam stop. If light somehow could penetrate the mirror and hit the substrate below, it too would be flat and reflect off at the same angle and hit the beam stop. The mirror has to be tilted at a specific angle to change the angle of light so it can go up and hit the lens. I wonder if you are quoting AI hallucinations.

[boredjedi]

Do you see those gaps in-between the Mirrors? That's what I'm talking about. If I could get a better closer image (like the steph one that shows the
gap between the mirrors, I guarantee you it would be grayscale not black. Also, when I'm watching a movie and the entire screen is that dark gray
on completely black scenes. With the W1070 projector we are talking a 240 watt of light beaming on that thing.

I do believe the smaller TVs use less bulb wattage. While I was typing this I did look into your old TV. 132 watt replacement bulb.
Samsung HLP5063-W replacement Lamp Code is BP96-00608A (p)

https://www.justanswer.com/tv-repair...esolution.html

https://www.amazon.com/CTLAMP-BP96-0.../dp/B078LTNVQ7

Prices I'm seeing range from $70 and up. That's actually not bad.

[chuft]

I don't know man. That could be an artifact of the crystals on the screen surface scattering light from the adjacent lit squares. Whatever it is, it should not be the same as a solid black screen, since in that case the mirrors are definitely reflecting the light into a beam stop and only the edges between them would cast light under your theory. Turn it on and see what is there with a solid black screen. If you see black squares and grey lines that means it's the edges between the mirrors. If you see something else, tell us.

DLP is known for its true blacks. That has always been one of its major selling points. Complaining about its blacks is like complaining about how noisy US subs are. It doesn't make any sense, unless like I say projectors have some problems TVs don't. But even when I look up DLP advantages for projectors, contrast and true blacks is always mentioned.

[boredjedi]

I have a nagging memory it's the projector. I'm starting to remember somethings.
Like I stated it uses a very bright bulb 240 watts. The W1070 did get the nickname of Light Cannon.
I learned all that when researching it. It was also a gamers choice due to it having a really good input lag of only 20ms.
A lot of gamers bought that projector. Most of the projectors at that time were in the 30-40ms range.


I did a little more digging I don't remember coming across this one before but then again nearly 10 years ago.
The only thing missing from that review is the input lag.

BenQ certainly didn’t skimp on the lamp, since the light output of the tiny W1070 is fantastic: 44.34 footlamberts (ftL) on my 102-inch 1.0-gain screen.
To put that in perspective, it’s roughly 50% brighter than the Sony and JVC projectors featured in our February/March issue, and those were 3.5 to 4 times more expensive.
However, the W1070’s contrast ratio wasn’t nearly as good as either of those, and here’s where the BenQ shows its budget roots.
At the aforementioned brightness, the black level was 0.0233 ftL. This is definitely in the “dark gray, not black” category, yielding a native contrast ratio of 1,903:1.
That’s not great for a projector, and it’s lower than many flat-panel LCDs (and definitely lower than plasmas).
There’s a SmartEco mode that dims the lamp depending on the image being displayed for a slightly improved dynamic contrast ratio.
Even so, it doesn’t help a ton. In this mode, the BenQ’s black level dropped to a still-high 0.0153 ftL, while its maximum light output stayed the same (2,908:1, dynamic).

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...ojector-page-2

There's also a mention about

There was a fair amount of light leakage, which showed up on the wall around the screen. It wasn’t terrible, but it was somewhat noticeable.

I took care of that with my own mod. Nothing destructive.

I still say it's because all that brightness from the 240 watt bulb is causing the substrate to cast that gray. Defeating the black level normally for DLP.

Still for $746.48 (MSRP $1000) on sale not a bad purchase. The maximum screen size is supposed to be a recommended 200" and I'm casting that Lazytown on a 200"
well 190" screen since I put that black border around it. Giving it a more professionally made look. And look how bright that image is still.
Easily go to 300" more than likely before the image begins to dim substantially. 😄

There's always some sort of tradeoffs

[boredjedi]

LazyPooky


Lost Music Generator From the 90s

Microsoft Music Producer which was hidden with Microsoft Visual InterDev 1997
She tries to make a Synth pop song which actually didn't come out too bad

[possessor]

love her videos

[boredjedi]

possessor of mine

[possessor]

possessor of mine

this fight is one of the highlights of the movie! i prefer this fight scene from the sequel

[boredjedi]

The video I posted, I prefer those types of fights because they are over the top and humorous.