Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Dvd On Different Res Panels
Lumenlab > LLAVS: Lumenlab AVS > Projector Builder > Beginner's Forum, START HERE
bb7_rider
Hi, I'm about to build a projector, and im currently confused about just one thing. Dvd Video, and how it will look with different resolutions.

Native DvD resolution is just 720×576, so, will it look more detailed on a 1920x1080 screen, than on a 720x576 screen? The way I see it is, with the high res screen, the video is being stretched to fit the screen, whereas using a lower res, smaller panel, its being blown up by the lense more instead.

It's just got me a little confused thats all.

I was originally thinking of buildinga 1080p projector, but I can't justify the price at the moment, especially with controller boards that do 1:1 pixel mapping being around the $400ish mark.. So I'm planning to just go with a 1024x768 15" screen, and build a whole projector for half the price the controller board for the HD one would cost!

I searched 1024x768, but didnt find much, how many people use panels with this res?

The only input I ever plan to use at the moment will be from the PC, how good is picture quality going to be?

at the moment, I have no plans to play HD DVD / Blueray, so is there any point spending so so much more on a HD projector?

Links to pictures of what a 1024x768 screen playing DvD will look like would be great.

Any help anyone can provide would be appreciated.
kdvail
Although I have plans to build a new projector with a higher resolution panel, my current projector uses a 1024x768.

You can check it out here;

http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=16897
umesh kumar
Excellent question my friend.I too have noticed this but i donot have some substantial proof.Look at our regular 21" TV.The lines are more vivid than the pixels in on our LCD yet the TV reproduces much better depth and realism whereas the LCD moniotr doesnot produce those depths on a normal computer.
NinHowFritz
I think the reason a tube TV will look more vivid is because of high contrast ratio, and high color saturation.
vonneuton
With my projector, I was using a 14" XGA (1024x768) panel. Here's a link to some of the
movie screenshots. They're small, but you can see that everything was nice and sharp.
fmerrill
QUOTE (bb7_rider @ Sep 30 2007, 04:23 AM) *
I searched 1024x768, but didnt find much, how many people use panels with this res?

The only input I ever plan to use at the moment will be from the PC, how good is picture quality going to be?

at the moment, I have no plans to play HD DVD / Blueray, so is there any point spending so so much more on a HD projector?


Most of the standard 15" DIY projectors are 1024x768, because that was the most common resolution of 15" LCD panels. If you want to see pictures, look at some of the PLOGs, I'm guessing there are a lot of pictures of such.
I personally have a 1024x768 projector, and honestly, the picture is great in my opinion.
Honestly, if primarily what you will be watching is PC content, and DVDs, there is nothing at all wrong with using 1024x768.
bb7_rider
Thanks all, looks like I will just go with the 1024 x 768 panel then, sourced a Compaq 1501 for $80 inc postage, and its already been stripped for me smile.gif

specs are 350:1 contrast, 45ms response which are a little lower than I would have liked, but for the price I can't complain, probably won't play any FPS on it anyway, althought would be kinda cool at 120" biggrin.gif

Just waiting for a email back from LL, postage calculator came to $100 for 2 fresnels and the s15 lense, which surely cant be right, even to aus huh.gif
umesh kumar
NinHowFritz=You may be right but i havenot come across an information on the CONTRAST RATIO of the CRTs.No company mentions that.

vonneuton=As for sharpness and niceness our LL PJs are great but satuaration and depthwise at larger sizes like 100" they lag a little behind.

fmerrill=I too think that there is nothing wrong with 1024x768 LCDs.The only problem with these is the pixel pitch which becomes quite visible at 90-100".That's the only downside.I guess the 10.6" would be great as the pixel pitch is really small in comparison to the 15" LCD's pitch.
fmerrill
QUOTE (umesh kumar @ Oct 1 2007, 12:30 AM) *
fmerrill=I too think that there is nothing wrong with 1024x768 LCDs.The only problem with these is the pixel pitch which becomes quite visible at 90-100".That's the only downside.I guess the 10.6" would be great as the pixel pitch is really small in comparison to the 15" LCD's pitch.


I have a screen at 120" diagonal right now, and, although I can clearly see screen door if I approach the screen, I cannot see it from a proper viewing distance. So, it's not any problem for me.
vonneuton
QUOTE (umesh kumar @ Oct 1 2007, 12:30 AM) *
vonneuton=As for sharpness and niceness our LL PJs are great but satuaration and depthwise at larger sizes like 100" they lag a little behind.

Yeah. That's why I've never gone over 75" with any PJ. Viewing distance is too great
over that size for me (I don't like seeing screen door ever), and it definitely looks a bit
better brightness and color wise.
SupraGuy
How the DVD resolution will work on your monitor depends on how good the upscaling is. Most PC software DVD players upscale quite well, so the picture looks excellent.

Colour and contrast on a CRT is better than a typical LCD screen, though new LCDs are getting better. The one on my desk right now is an excellent example.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.