OT - Plasma TV question

"Kobra" wrote in message
...

snip

You need to fix the clock on your PC (or perhaps your news server's
clock)... It's a couple of days fast (i.e. it says the 28th and it's only
the 26th right now)...

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
Not sure about the DLP projectors, but the normal DLP units are rather
directional in their viewing angle...

Sounds like you're thinking of rear-projection systems. Viewing angle for a
front-projection system (which I think is what most people are talking about
here) is more dependent on the screen than the projector (which is actually
the issue for rear-projection too, except you don't get to pick your screen
for one of those ).

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
And that leads to the question, what about burn-in on a plasma screen TV?

I suspect that watching a lot of 4x3 source in its native aspect ratio
would be a problem for a plasma TV, no?

It can be, but usually the plasma will use a tested neutral gray for the
side bars, to try to minimize that problem. As far as I have read, it's not
any worse an issue than the usual burn-in problems with plasmas (and yes,
plasmas are not nearly as bad about burn-in as they used to be...but it
still happens).

Pete

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:utiMf.581199$084.236677@attbi_s22...
Say again? Dim LCD displays can be repaired by replacing a BULB?

Yes. The reason an LCD dims is that the bulb output (usually some kind of
cold cathode or fluourescent) gets reduced over time. A new bulb corrects
the problem.

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Given that it is so easy to Google either DLP or MEMS, it shouldn't
matter.


So why bother answering Jay's "what's a 'digital light processor'" question
at all? Google would have given him WAY more information on that than any
of us have.

To heighten his curiousity and give him even more incentive to look up
the acronyms. So why bother commenting on my reponse and using an
acronym in your useless comment?


[...]
We use probably 50 where I work in our conference rooms and, trust me, the
cheap ones just don't cut it unless you are in a cave to view them.


You haven't earned my trust.

And for that I'm grateful. I only care if people I respect trust me.


Furthermore, I have seen DLP projectors NOT "in a cave", which cost only
around $3000, and which do the job just fine. Your blanket statement is
patently false. Frankly, I don't really care to argue about the price
point, but if you insist on continuing the "you can't spend less than $5000
and get a decent projector", I don't feel I have a choice. That statement
is simply wrong.

I'm sure Jay is smart enough to compare a few options for himself. If
he's happy with a cheap projector, that is fine with me. I'm just
encouraging him to look at a range of options before jumping at a cheap
solution that he'll be disappointed in later. My impression, though
I've yet to meet him personally, is that he likes to do things right
with his Inn and buying a cheap projector and shining it on a painted
wall simply isn't a quality solution no matter how much you claim it to be.


If you want to define "decent", and you manage to come up with a definition
that supports your statement, by all means do so. But as long as you
continue to use an ambiguous term like "decent", and yet insist that a
"decent" projector can't be had for less than $5000 (or even within some
small percentage of that price), you are making incorrect and misleading
statements.

I'm sorry my standards are much higher than yours.


So, do you have any idea of what it is you actually mean by "decent"? That
is, some quantifiable number that describes one or more specific performance
parameters of a DLP projector? If so, then post that (or those) parameters,
and we'll see whether or not there are any projectors less than $5000 that
meet that (or those) criteria.

Unfortunately, there is no set of specifications that completely
characterize how the human eye perceives an image. Camera companies and
others have tried for decades to develop them, but they still fall
short. Certainly brightness and contrast ratio are important, but keep
in mind that most of these specs are provided by the manufacturer and
there is huge variance among them. I'd only trust numbers that were
generated by a competent lab not affiliated with a given manufacturer.

The best way to know what you like is to look at as many options as you
have the patience for and compare them in situations as close as
possible to how you plan to use the device. For me "decent" is
something I'd be willing to buy for myself, and of the projectors I've
seen, I've seen few less than $5K that I'd buy for myself. I will be
buying one in another 3-4 months so I've been looking at them a fair bit
of late.

Matt

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

View them side by side and then you'll see my definition of decent. There
is simply no comparison. If you want to see fine detail in scenery,
instruments, etc., you won't be happy on a white painted wall.


I'm not talking about a white painted wall. I'm talking about a nice,
budget-priced screen. In any case, if the best you can come up with for a
definition of "decent" is "the difference between a $1000 screen and a $300
screen", then you haven't proven anything. You've simply chosen to define
"decent" in a way that tautologically "proves" your point.

I didn't even try to define it. I suggested how you could know it when
you see it. If you are happy with a cheap projector on a cheap screen,
then what is your problem with me not being happy with it? My standards
are simply higher than yours. Not a problem for me, and I'm not sure
why it bothers you so much.


Matt

Peter Duniho wrote:

It can be, but usually the plasma will use a tested neutral gray for the
side bars, to try to minimize that problem. As far as I have read, it's not
any worse an issue than the usual burn-in problems with plasmas (and yes,
plasmas are not nearly as bad about burn-in as they used to be...but it
still happens).

Thanks, Pete. I will be looking to purchase later this year and started
the research process.

--
Peter

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
To heighten his curiousity and give him even more incentive to look up the
acronyms.

lol...so you were being annoying on purpose? Well, at least you admit it.

So why bother commenting on my reponse and using an acronym in your
useless comment?

To illustrate a point. Duh. I guess you wouldn't know anything about that,
though. Probably over your head.

You haven't earned my trust.

And for that I'm grateful.

Really? Being "grateful" means you care.

I only care if people I respect trust me.

Well, it's nice that you respect me. But you still haven't earned my trust.

I'm sure Jay is smart enough to compare a few options for himself.

One hopes so, yes.

If he's happy with a cheap projector, that is fine with me. I'm just
encouraging him to look at a range of options before jumping at a cheap
solution that he'll be disappointed in later.

No, you are not "just" doing that. You are making claims that are
unjustified and false.

My impression, though I've yet to meet him personally, is that he likes to
do things right with his Inn and buying a cheap projector and shining it
on a painted wall simply isn't a quality solution no matter how much you
claim it to be.

Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? I have not once argued in
favor of a painted wall (though, done right a painted wall is exactly like a
quality screen), nor have I argued in favor of a "cheap projector".

Your need to invent statements and attribute them to me is a very clear
indication of the weakness of your own statements. How about you stick to
the facts, then we'll see just how much sense you make.

I'm sorry my standards are much higher than yours.

Um...huh? You have no idea whether your standards are higher than mine, nor
is it plausible that you'd actually be sorry if mine were in fact lower.

Unfortunately, there is no set of specifications that completely
characterize how the human eye perceives an image.

So what? There ARE specifications that differentiate one projector from
another, and which do a VERY good job of predicting performance.

Your statement is just a cop-out. Not surprising, given your lack of a
point, but a cop-out nonetheless.

[...] For me "decent" is something I'd be willing to buy for myself, and
of the projectors I've seen, I've seen few less than $5K that I'd buy for
myself. I will be buying one in another 3-4 months so I've been looking
at them a fair bit of late.

I'm guessing you'll wire the whole thing up with Monster Cable products too.
Have fun.

Pete

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
I'm considering installing a big-screen plasma (or LCD) TV in our
meeting room at the inn, for use during presentations, etc.

After almost a year of shopping and comparing, I got a 50" Panasonic
plasma because it had the sharpest, highest contrast picture of any I
saw. When Consumer Reports top-rated it, that sealed the deal. Hi Def
is awesome.

CR reported that burn-in is no longer a serious problem with plasmas,
given reasonable care. At the rate display technology is advancing, I
don't expect to keep it more than 5 years, anyway.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Peter R. wrote:
Peter Duniho wrote:


It can be, but usually the plasma will use a tested neutral gray for the
side bars, to try to minimize that problem. As far as I have read, it's not
any worse an issue than the usual burn-in problems with plasmas (and yes,
plasmas are not nearly as bad about burn-in as they used to be...but it
still happens).


Thanks, Pete. I will be looking to purchase later this year and started
the research process.

Do a lot of research. You won't believe how much misinformation is out
there. For example go to any TV store or a Costco. I noticed that all
the TV's looked equally good when they were all showing the same movie.
Couldn't figure out why anybody would pay an extra $1500-2000 for the
HDTV vs the EDTV. Then I learned that movies on DVD are not HD, they
are ED. I just assumed that DVD's were HD. After further research I
found out the you can not tell the difference between an HDTV and an
EDTV when you are watching an HD signal on a 42 inch plasma, the HDTV
only comes into its own at about 50 inches. I was also told by a
salesman at Best Buy that an HD picture will not even display on an
EDTV. Wrong again. I ended up buying an EDTV from Costco and also
getting the HD package from Directv. Watching the NFL games and the
Olympics in HD was great. Watching Hogans Hero's in HD is also great.
There are no doubt a lot of sites to learn about HD, CNET.com was one
that I liked best.