Ed's view - A New Light

Ed,

My experience with single chip DLP RPTV displays has been quite different from the assertions and perceptions in your openning paragraph. Most especially, the HLP and HLS series of Samsung HD DLPs can be calibrated to nearly perfect colorimetry. Certain DLP displays have included the adjustment parameters necessary to align their color primaries and secondaries to match both the 601 and 709 specifications. This is extremely rare in consumer televisions. What consumer displays have you seen with equal or better color accuracy? What exactly are you comparing DLP RPTVs to?

Your description of "...definition a little bit better that (sic) SDTV, but certainly not HDTV," completely baffles me. This is far from my experiences in viewing, installing, and calibrating DLP RPTVs in the last several years.

Perhaps you haven't been exposed to well-designed DLP RPTVs. There are definitely models with unobjectionable color wheel bearings. Most consumers don't have a problem with color separation motion artifacts, as can be determined by the enormous popularity of this format. I don't see the 'rainbow artifactiing' on single chip DLPs, but some people are sensitive to this phenomenon.

I have yet to encounter a perfect HDTV design. Each display type has unique imaging strengths and weaknesses. Frequently, it's the specific application and viewing environment that determine which display type is best suited for the user. I simply cannot aggree with your generalized analysis of RPTV DLP HDTV performance.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I have yet to encounter a perfect HDTV design. Each display type has unique imaging strengths and weaknesses. Frequently, it's the specific application and viewing environment that determine which display type is best suited for the user. I simply cannot aggree with your generalized analysis of RPTV DLP HDTV performance.

[Based on the above and] at the risk of putting you on the spot, so to speak, Ed, which HDTV design, in your estimation, comes as near to perfection as can be feasibiy expected with the HDTV technology as it stands today ? Given that the application and viewing environment are as near to the optimum without breaking the bank, so please don't do an end run around the question via the " it all depends " route.

Edited by HD Library

Today, for RPTV, it is LCoS technology. For flat panel, it is LCD. Tomorrow, both will be better with LED lighting. Ed

Thank you, Ed, for your straightforward response. I happen to concur with your choices and prognosis.

People reading this thread should be aware that the statements made here are simply the opinions of individuals and not necessarily shared by others who do not necessarily have the same experiences voiced by the original poster(s). A lot of times some of these opinions (while the perfect right of the speaker) are so far off the mark from others' observations that they lead to rather heated discussions. In many cases, what one person considers extremely important is considered to be splitting hairs by another person. Everyone has their own perception of what makes for a good picture.


I find it a bit confrontational when words such as "poor" and "mockery" are tossed about by someone trying to make an otherwise learned post. In my own experience I find it hard to describe DLP (even single chip DLP) in these terms or to state that HDTV on such devices is "certainly not HDTV." Maybe by that person's standards, but I would find it hard to believe that this is a major opinion by any reasonable standard.

I found that my Runco CL-710 single chip DLP FP produced an excellent HDTV picture in my estimation and my current HP MD5880n DLP RPM is still providing me with an amazing set of 1080p images. I've recently upgraded my Runco to a JVC DLA-RS1 so I guess that some might think I've left the dark side.

In any event, I'm a big fan of DLP and would have probably stayed with a DLP FP if the three chip models weren't priced in the stratosphere. As it is, the RS-1 is, to me, hard to beat not only at its price, but at any price and I'm extremely happy with my current choices.

Robert,

It is interesting you mentioned the key word

Rodolfo,

Thank you for your response. Your opinion and mine are on the same page here. It's just that you stated it far more eloquently and with considerably more substance than I did. Your analysis, as usual, makes for quite a compelling "view."

I have absolutely no problem with people expressing their opinions on any matter in a public forum. That is, of course, their right and not something that I would argue against. My only concern is for the casual reader who might be looking for helpful information and take such a written position (especially one that mocks other alternatives) as technogical gospel rather than as opinion. The tendency for some to engage in "confrontational dialogue" is an unfortunate reality of our Internet environment and one of the reasons that I, as you, avoid certain sites where a combination of dubious information and an aggressive delivery make it hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Opinions are great to have and to share as long as everyone understands what they are and where they come from.

Take care.