C'mon Charlie,
You can't win a debate by getting into goofy definitions...
Thousandths or ten thousandths of an inch are important when
each pixel in the device is about 0.001" square. One
ten thousandth of an inch shift would be 0.1 pixel....
Or, to assure no more than 0.01 pixel of misconvergence the original alignment would need to be within 0.00001" and stay that close forever. Do you have any idea how small that is? I'm not sure how much misconvergence one can see, but I suspect it falls somewhere between these figures.
[The pixels on an HD2 device are actually smaller than 0.001 by almost half IIRC]
I'm not here to win a debate. I'm here to discuss topics of interest. Maybe that's the problem.
You said 3 chip systems must have convergence problems and they must have adjustments to the convergence.
Wrong! Nice strawman, although a bit rushed. If you work into it more slowly you can sometimes get them to bite
before you burn it down.
What I said is:
Up to a point, but any time you have 3 optical systems there is the potential.
Which is true. I've not seen any proof otherwise. If the system is carefully manufactured it my be a vanishingly small problem, but I don't know, nor do you, apparently. If you do, how much is the typical 3 chip DLP misconvergence? An answer of zero is the same as you don't know, BTW.
Yes, nothing's perfect. DUH. At an atomic level everything's shifting. Thanks Mr. Wizard. ....
Not just at an atomic level. It is not uncommon in systems that have lots of thermal cycles to suffer stress related failures on the traces, devices and sockets. There is tremendous research on newer, lower coefficeint of expansion cicuit board materials for some classes of applications. Have you ever worked with really precision optics? I'm not talking small format SLR camreas either. I suspect the part of the board where the light hits the chips gets quite hot .... but who knows for sure? TI I suppose.
My point remains unchanged... 3 chip systems have NO convergence adjustments, because they have NO convergence problems. This is 'perfect convergence' in 'real world' terms since you will never see the fringing error.
How many 3 chip DLP systems have you viewed. More to the point, how many have you serviced? Can you even cite a source?
Well DLP color isn't digital... What do you think happens to that spinning color wheel that's being bombarded w/ a super high power/burning hot lightbulb 100% of the time when running?
Dunno - if I tried to answer I'd be guessing. Cite your source.
FWIW I never said the color wheel was a better solution - look back over the thread. I said they both have potential issues and I'm excited to see which is better once the technology matures. The reason (and I agree it's true) CRT has the lead at this moment is simply decades of R&D and millions of unit experience. It is about as good as it will ever get, and one or more of these emerging technologies will surpass it in the relatively near future.
And color convergence problems due to a one chip DLP system is why many people (note- I didn't say 'all' OR 'most') have problems w/ rainbows with DLP.
Do you know what color misconvergence is? It's not the source of the rainbow phenomenon. Unless you're somehow redefining color convergence as something applicable to the temporal domain.
Or maybe take my $3K 65" Mitsu. You don't like CRT I guess..., so tell me what would you want to make this set better in your opinion?
I have a RP CRT and I like it fine. I don't mean to hurt you feelings about your set - I'm sure it's better than what I'm currently using. Feel better?
I also drive a car with a gasoline powered internal combustion engine, but I'm not touting it as the future of powerplants, either.
BTW - I find your condescending attitude childish. I'm sure you're better than that, probably just having a bad day. Have a drink or two and enjoy your HT.
[This message has been edited by charlie (edited November 26, 2002).]
Previous Topic
Index
