SVGA vs XGA

[Trevor Schell]

Hi!

It's great to see a lot of us making the move to FPTV.
I noticed that many of the new lower priced DLP FPTV's that
are being purchased are SVGA 800x600 Resolutions.
Not many are investing in the XGA 1024x768 Resolution DLP FPTV's
I realize that they cost a bit more money. However wouldn't it be benificial to invest into the XGA or is it not that much of a difference for DVD and HI-DEF feeds.
Hopefully somebody can explain this.

I would use one for DVD and HI-DEF Sattelite viewing which is coming soon..

Thanks!.




Trevor
My HomeTheater S.E.
Sonically Enhanced
C5

[Claude D D]

Here's a link with some info

http://www.projectorcentral.com/buyers2.htm

[Trevor Schell]

Thanks Claude.
The link provides a good understanding
of the Brightness and the role it plays in the image VS lighting in the room.
The resolution section also provides a good understanding, however the source used for example is computers.
How would we compare the resolution needs for DVD or Hi-Def?
Also, nothing was mentioned in regards to Contrast ratio and its role VS room lighting ETC..




Trevor
My HomeTheater S.E.
Sonically Enhanced
C5

[Lex]

Certainly, I had my sights set on the highest resolution I could afford. However, given that I didn't know what pj to order, I opted to take the easy way out and just try one that was on the shelf locally. Well, it turns out, I was happy enough with 480P to call that projector mine. With HD broadcats? cats I was VERY pleased. As long as you can get back from the PJ about 14 feet, 800 X 600 with a good source can look damn good.

Lex

[Andrew Pratt]

I tend to agree with what my PJ uses with its 1/4HD resolution LCD panels...it makes it sharp for DVD's and its very easy to scale HD material properly. I'd love to have a higher resolution panel but honestly I don't think its wise to spend too much on PJ's right now given how quickly the industry is moving...but that's no reason to wait...grab a Studio Experience 1HD for $1800 shipped and enjoy the big screen feeling

[Trevor Schell]

Sounds like you need a pretty dark room for LCD ,,Correct.
DLP is more forgiving of small amounts of outside light ..correct?




Trevor
My HomeTheater S.E.
Sonically Enhanced
C5

[Andrew Pratt]

Neither has an advantage in that respect...it comes down to how many lumens the projector has and the screen you are using. You need to come over for a demo trevor and I can show you what I mean. I'd bet you'd buy one shortly there after though

[Energeezer]

There is another solution.
Sorry I have to put my 2 cents in re CRT.

If you want resolution and you don't want to spend big bucks then CRT is an option. There are some pretty reputable resellers that will get you a unit with most of it's life remaining that will easily best even the most expensive digitals in terms of resolution, color balance, black levels and flexibilty re I/P. It is my experience that only VERY recently have the DLP machines given an image of quality. I'm not talking about the cheaper units like the X1 but the more expesive stuff like the Infocus 7200 or higher. You'll get an 8" EM focus CRT that will more than compete with these units for a lot less money. I'm resisting the temptation to say that CRT is better because for some it is and for some it isn't depending on your needs.
I will say this. IMO the current crop of DLPs and LCDs will be outdated very fast while the high end CRTs will STILL be around for a while. CRT could do 1080p in the early 90s. Sure digital will surpass the CRT in all aspects but by that time the current crop will be long gone.
So I have to agree with Andrews strategy of not breaking the bank on a high end digital PJ at the moment no matter what you do. Go for a cheaper digital and gain conveince and light O/P or go for a good used 8" or 9"CRT and get a better image (IMO of course) but put up with the inconviences tagged to the technology.
In return for getting all the benefits with a CRT you are stuck with a fairly complex setup, no portability (similar to an big screen TV in this respect)
and a requirement for light control in your theater.




The Future of HT lies in FP SPREAD THE WORD

[Chris D]

Me, I'm choosing to set a MINIMUM resolution limit of widescreen XGA on the projector that I'm going to buy. With the latest round of product releases this month, XGA can be had for under $2,000, like the new Z2 or HS-20. (note that if you get an XGA (768) vertical resolution display in native 4:3, if you watch a widescreen movie you're only using about 575 or so of the vertical pixels, so you're not getting the resolution you would if you had a native widescreen PJ. The reverse is not true, though)

I've been thinking also that although I'm choosing now as the time to jump into FP, now is NOT the time to sink a whole bunch of money into it as FP quality and technology is increasing at a much, much more rapid rate now than pretty much any other home theater component, and a PJ will not hold it's place in the performance lineup for too long.




CHRIS
Luke: "Hey, I'm not such a bad pilot myself, you know"

[Energeezer]

and a PJ will not hold it's place in the performance lineup for too long.

Agreed, unless it is a CRT. I doubt some new digital tech is going to come out in the next couple years that clearly bests CRT image quality at a price competitive to what an almost new CRT is.




The Future of HT lies in FP SPREAD THE WORD

[Andrew Pratt]

Steve that depends on if you have to pay someone else to come out on a semi regular basis to tweak that CRT. You and I don't mind doing those sorts of things but I know lots of people that would end up paying someone to do it which could get expensive...of course there's bulb costs on digital displays as well to factor in which depending on the hours you plan on using it could be a large factor as well.

[George Bellefontaine]

To get back to Trevor's SVGA vs XGA and why many opt for the lower resolution is probably #1 lower price
#2 only plan to use it with dvds.
And I've been told that 800 x 600 ain't too shabby on HDTV, too. I don't know about that because I don't have access to Hi-Def material, and I don't own an 800 x 600 PJ.

But truth is, 800 x 600 is a starting point for many. I mean, to have Front Projection for just over or even a bit under $1000 is pretty darn sensational. And these newbies to FP can well afford to upgrade ( and upgrade they will) now that they have the fever.




My Homepage!

[Claude D D]

Like George said a SVGA unit is fine if you watch DVD's as well as regular cable and Satalite.But the XGA or higher will offer a higher pixel count that could benifit HDTV.
Much is dependant on the scaler and video processor in the projo or the external scaler/processor being used.
I saw the Toshiba clone of the X1 playing Ice Age on a Marantz D-VHS on a 92" 16:9 screen and even scaled down(to 800x450) it was quite impressive.

[Energeezer]

Andrew
The truth is that the original setup is complex. After that there really is no tweaking unless you are a tweaker. I've sold several of these units here in town, set them up and 'tweaked" them to the best of my ability within a reasonable time frame. I have never once had to return to a customers place to do convergence or tweak any furthur. This surprissed me as well and I keep asking the guys if the convergence is good.
These things are fairly stable as long as they are set up correctly in the first place. If one is compensating for a bad mech alignment with a lot of electronic correction then the settings will drift more over time and the initial image will never be as good as it could be.
I have gone for periods of 6 months w/o touching the converg or any other settings on my XG and I'm a heavy tweaker so........




The Future of HT lies in FP SPREAD THE WORD

[Chris D]

Yup, going back to the original question, the reason that I'm choosing to accept XGA as a minimum resolution is simple screen size. I plan to go with a 96" or larger WIDTH screen. At that size, lower resolutions tend to suffer a lot, so I'll be watching as much hi-def material as possible. DVD's and standard television, I'll be upconverting to 1080i through the satellite box or DVD player. Not true hi-def, but better than 480p.




CHRIS
Luke: "Hey, I'm not such a bad pilot myself, you know"

[Energeezer]

Yup then XGA is definately the minimum.
When using a 92" width screen with my CRTs I select a minimum of 1024/768 for 4/3 and a minimum of 1280/720 for 16/9.
At those resolutions and a seating distance of about 10-12 feet I can still see some structure if I look real hard but it is OK. Any less the image does suffer!!!
IMO the goal is to use the lowest resolution you can while not seeing scan line structure (CRT) I would think the same would hold true for digital but you would be looking for the minimum to hide pixel structure. Yes??




The Future of HT lies in FP SPREAD THE WORD

[Trevor Schell]

Thanks guys!!

note that if you get an XGA (76 vertical resolution display in native 4:3, if you watch a widescreen movie you're only using about 575 or so of the vertical pixels, so you're not getting the resolution you would if you had a native widescreen PJ. The reverse is not true, though)

Chris,,That solidifies my choice to 16x9 only,,that would be a must.

Steve,,I am a plug and play type guy, So CRT would be out of the question..DLP or LCD would be the route I would need to take right now.

When using a 92" width screen with my CRTs I select a minimum of 1024/768 for 4/3 and a minimum of 1280/720 for 16/9.

That limits it down to XGA or better for me then.
The screen size I would plan to put in would be 92"

Some XGA FPTV's are comaptible up to 1280x1024,,,What does that mean.
It wouldn't a native resolution ,,would it still be suitable or look irregular?

George!!:T,,I will find a new babe pick for you!




Trevor
My HomeTheater S.E.
Sonically Enhanced
C5

[Andrew Pratt]

Some XGA FPTV's are comaptible up to 1280x1024,,,What does that mean.
It wouldn't a native resolution ,,would it still be suitable or look irregular?

It meas that it will display that image. I've feed all sorts of resolutions from my notebook to my PJ and it just adjusts and displays the image fine...obviously 4:3 gets stretched if I leave it full mode but it actually doesn't look that bad and would do fine for gaming etc.