my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » wich is better 1.2" DMD or 0.98# DMD (Page 2)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: wich is better 1.2" DMD or 0.98# DMD Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 09-03-2009 03:00 AM                     Thx for the correction, Steve ... gee, that was a bit embarassing...being told wrong info by the installer from STRONG. (Shows how much STRONG installers knows about their equipment - is what the installer told me that the 1600 uses a 1.2 DMD when we had two units installed - and I believed him .. ) -Monte  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 09-03-2009 06:22 AM                     Thx for the correction, Steve ... gee, that was a bit embarassing...was told otherwise . let's try this one..since I try to edit and my time had expired.. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-03-2009 09:02 AM                     No, not near that much Brendan but enough to add up on a multiple install of them. The lens mount on the NEC is also much more user friendly.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 09-04-2009 02:50 AM                     Christie told me that some 1.2" DLP-DCI projectors can do tripleflash, but not at full 2k resolution, because the driver electronics (Efib board) is not fast enough. Hence they use a smaller window of the DLPs when doing 3D-TF. The zoom lens then has to be adjusted to fill the entire screen again, with less resolution and light efficiency, because the light path is constructed to use the full panel. If one is interested in 3D, I would at least rule out this issue - you want full format tripleflash. Old 1.2" chipsets would do 1628*880 flat/3D-TF and 1920*804 scope/3D-TF. New 1.2" chipsets 1998*1080 flat/3D-TF and 2048*858 cope/3D-TF. They also claimed that Christie currently is the only 1.2" DCI-DLP manufacturer that can do full-format triple-flash. I understood that all 0.98" projectors can do full-format triple flash, though. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-04-2009 03:49 AM                     Carsten...yes...1.2" EFIB based projectors can do triple flash 3D but as you say, not at full-resolution. Note too, sometimes you can't merely zoom the lens but you have to change it to get the extra magnfication. This has you loose resolution (fewer pixels) and ALSO loose light since you are effectively closing down an aperture in the imager. Exactly the opposite of what 3D needs! To the best of my knowledge, Christie is the only manufacturer, CURRENTLY, offering FFIB boards on their 1.2" projectors to do full-frame triple-flash. They also have an upgrade path for existing machines...though it isn't cheap...AND it will need to be upgraded again when the FIPS level 2 thing comes out later this year. Steve  |  IP: Logged Pietro Clarici Expert Film Handler Posts: 136 From: Foligno (PG) Italy Registered: Sep 2008 posted 09-04-2009 05:31 AM                        The new NEC NC2500S-A can do full-frame triple flash, and the existing model can be upgraded as well. They'll be doing the upgrade on mine in a few weeks.  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 09-04-2009 06:12 AM                    Of course, when we were referring to some projectors currently not offering triple-flash on 1.2" models ... we meant "full resolution" triple-flash ...  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 09-04-2009 07:36 AM                     What size would have been in the NEC NC-800 which I used to operate?  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-04-2009 12:06 PM                     1.2"  |  IP: Logged Peter Castle Expert Film Handler Posts: 220 From: Wollongong University, NSW ,Australia Registered: Oct 2003 posted 09-11-2009 06:59 AM                     We have a similar decision between an NEC1600 and a Christie 2000-ZX, but the price difference is the other way (Christie less than NEC). What is the significance of the lens situation? It seems each have lens focus/zoom/position presets for different inputs - is there one which is faster to change? We also are looking at Xpand 3D.  |  IP: Logged Brendan Penny Expert Film Handler Posts: 121 From: Bundoora, Australia Registered: Dec 2008 posted 09-11-2009 11:28 AM                     You already wasted a boat load of money on that stupid panasonic 1080 thing so why not compliment your past decisions by adding xpand. The shittest 3D system out of all shit 3D systems. If you buy NEC in Australia good luck getting support a few years down the track when the self proclaimed savior of independent cinemas goes bust....again. I am constantly amazed by you stupid ass exhibitors. You just pick the cheapest shit everytime. Has nothing to do with quality, engineering, reliability. Just initial cost. Nobody wants to watch shit in 3D so just get over it already. 2k is shit. Digital is shit. Digital vs Shit projectionists is good.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-11-2009 11:46 AM                     Wow...I can see very little good coming from the above statement.  |  IP: Logged Demetris Thoupis Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1240 From: Aradippou, Larnaca, Cyprus Registered: Apr 2001 posted 09-11-2009 03:39 PM                     Brendan your think that your sarcascim makes you funny. It doesn't. Get over it.  |  IP: Logged Cameron Glendinning Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 845 From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia Registered: Dec 2005 posted 09-11-2009 03:51 PM                     Brendan, Peter works at a university, they have a very different AV buget to a cinema. I think you may even find that they have a sony 4k in one of their lecture halls. So he is not a commercial cinema exibitor ok.  |  IP: Logged Peter Castle Expert Film Handler Posts: 220 From: Wollongong University, NSW ,Australia Registered: Oct 2003 posted 09-11-2009 04:06 PM                     Not quite, Cameron. We have a Sony 2K in one of our small lecture rooms - very good. As for our Panasonic it has been a great projector for e-cinema on our 40' screen, and at least it may have a resale value (where our previous Sony and JVC projectors are still sitting on the floor of our projection rooms). We are definitely in a different financial situation from commercial cinemas. We don't expect ever to see a VPF. Our income is ploughed right back into facilities and if the current trend is to digital cinema we might as well be there. We beat local cinemas to digital sound (we have all three systems) so we'd like to keep on top of things. As for Xpand, we see little chance of installing any other system as the up-front cost is too high. Yes, the glasses are expensive but they can be purchased in phases. All I was seeking was informed opinions regarding the lens adjustment systems of the two alternatives: Nec1600 and Christie CP2000-ZX.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.