Text 11312, 71 rader
Skriven 2005-09-16 12:36:00 av JAY EMRIE (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JEFF GUERDAT
Ärende: Re: Power Point
=======================
Jeff, after replying earlier to this message I got to thinking.

I have an OLD InFocus LitePro LCD 580 projector. Here are some of its
specs:

Resolution - 640 x 480 VGA with intelligent compression for 800 x 600 -
Higher resolutions will be cropped. Keystone correction for only 13ø
300:1 contrast ratio 250 lumens

I know that there are far superior LCD/DLP projectors out there.An
Infocus LP70 for example:
2000 lumens - 1100:1 contrast ratio - 1024 x 768 native resolution -
keystone correction +/- 15ø - 1500 brightness.
These specs are far better than the 580 I have.

We just do not know which might be the best over all for our needs.

Those are just sample specs for one projector. There probably are some
that are considerably better. That is what we are trying to determine.
We want to compare both the specs and cost to try to determine which is
the best for us - capability AND coastwise.

Jay



 JG>GH> GH>My computer club has an "InFocus"
LP755 and it "automatically" JG>GH>interpolates JG>GH> GH>images to its
native 1024x768 ... occasionally you see some artifacts.

JG>GH> JE> Is that with text or photos?

JG>GH> Yes.

JG>JE>Maybe I should have said: Is that text or competition quality photos?
JG>JE>After all this is for a Camera Club.

JG>I haven't seen you acknowledge that virtually ANY projector the club can
JG>afford is going to interpolate the display.  A 4MP camera/scan is something
JG>like 2304x1728 (that's actually the image size of my wife's 4MP Kodak
DX6490).
JG>My film scanner scans at 5400dpi, leading to 8100x5400 images (if full frame
JG>35mm).  Will the club ever afford a projector that can natively project at
JG>even the lower resolution?  Will it be attached to a computer that can
display
JG>that resolution?  If the answer is "no" then it's a rather moot point - all
JG>you can do is attempt to minimize the interpolation artifacts.  The use of
JG>PicturesToExe has no bearing - Irfanview would be able to do the same thing
JG>although the algorithms used to determine what data to throw out to reduce
the
JG>image to screen resolution may be different and, hence one *may* look better
JG>than another if scrutinized closely enough (you'd never see it if doing a
JG>slide show, especially if the projector can't resolve the image at a higher
JG>rate, either).

JG>It you're judging digital images, it should likely be on the basis of a
print
JG>from a good dye-sub printer, not a projected image.  If the projected image
is
JG>what you have to go with, you must accept the limitations of the device
JG>displaying the image in the first place...


JG>---
JG>*Durango b211 * DurangoMail for Windows NT/9x
                                                                               
      

---
 þ OLXWin 1.00a þ Forgive and remember - be like an elephant.
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)