On 04/26/10 02:40, scott wrote:
>> Question: Why aren't there any widescreen cinemas yet?
> 
> WTF?

POTD

-- 
Copywight 1991 Elmer Fudd.  All wights wesewved

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 15:33:14 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> With our sound system, it's just like going to the cinema
> 
> My brother had movie theatre seats for a while too, until he realized a
> couch was more comfortable anyway.  It was amusing, tho. I think he
> still has them in storage.

We thought about doing that, but we'll only be in this house for about 
another year, then we're moving again (after the kid graduates college 
and moves out, this house is too big for just two of us); we decided that 
here in Utah, a house with a room that's easily converted to another 
bedroom would be more valuable, so all we have to do is patch the holes 
from the mounts for the screen and the projector - no problem. :-)

If we were going to be here longer, I'd have even run the wires for the 
speakers in the walls. :-)

>> On the downside, had to replace the bulb in the projector last weekend.
>> Had a spare on hand, but those bulbs are not cheap. :-/
> 
> That they aren't!

Got about 16 months of use out of the original one.  Noisy when they 
blow, too - like a firecracker going off.  I'd had one do that to me in a 
class I was teaching once, and still wasn't fully prepared for it when it 
went.

Looks like I can get my bulbs sub-$300, though, which isn't bad; the 
replacement I got was valued at $450 by Mitsubishi.

>> But yeah, our PS3 is connected to it, so I end up playing the
>> occasional game on that screen.  It's really nice - even my wife likes
>> it, and she initially thought the idea was ridiculous, but she now
>> admits freely that it was a good idea. :-)
> 
> Yeah. And a wii is pretty spectacular too when you're not looking at a
> tennis court that's 20" wide.

Yeah, last year our team did a "development week" (for the course 
developers), and one of the recreational activities was a wii connected 
to one of the screens in one of the big classrooms - I don't recall for 
sure, but I *think* those screens are 20' diagonal.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:25:12 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> Question: Why aren't there any widescreen cinemas yet?

I missed this the first time around, don't know about in MK, but over 
here, ALL of the cinemas are widescreen.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> bedroom would be more valuable, so all we have to do is patch the holes 
> from the mounts for the screen and the projector - no problem. :-)

Oh, these were just bolted to planks, basically. Totally movable. Not really 
the actual movie theatre experience, I'll grant.

We did have a row of airplane seats for a while, after the Frnklin Institute 
science museum closed their 747 exhibit and basically threw away the plane. 
Did you know insurance companies value a row of 747 seats at about $700, or 
at least did when we had the house fire back in 1985?

> If we were going to be here longer, I'd have even run the wires for the 
> speakers in the walls. :-)

That works even if you sell the house, mind. :-)  I had ethernet put in the 
walls before the put the drywall up, but I definitely should have had the 
speaker wires run too.

> Looks like I can get my bulbs sub-$300, 

I think my brother pays $800 or so for his. They're extra super bright or 
some nonsense. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm of the opinion that "full price 1080p" shouldn't be that expensive in 
>> the first place, and we should all be saving up for 4096p or something. 
>> But I guess that's next year's money draw...
>
> What's the advantage. Your *eyes* only have a limited resolution.

I think they need to increase the frame rate to 120 Hz or something first 
before making the resolution higher.  24 Hz is ridiculous.

Post a reply to this message

> You're telling me it's possible to tell the difference betwee 600dpi and 
> 1200dpi?

You can't really compare directly.  A lot of printing methods use a 
half-tone pattern to show various shades of colour, an LCD needs only 1 dot 
to show that colour.

Post a reply to this message

>  Digital TV could have benefited from using MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2, but
> it didn't. It's a bummer.

It's ok, it's changing.  All HDTV channels are compressed with MPEG-4 (in 
the UK and Germany at least) so I suspect eventually the MPEG-2 compressed 
channels will be gone.

Post a reply to this message

>  Not to talk about contrast...

Depends on the ambient light levels whether LCD or CRT offers better 
contrast.  Certainly in office environments (that are usually well it) LCD 
has higher contrast.  In dark rooms CRT is better, but the gap is 
continually closing.

>  Also, CRTs could be looked at from about any direction and it would
> always look exactly as good. Only in the last few years LCDs are
> *approaching* that (many still have problems when viewed from above
> or below).

Indeed, it's down to the LC mode used and obviously cost.  Cheap laptop/PC 
monitors are not designed to be viewing from any angle other than 
perpendicular, but a good TV will look the same from all angles (including 
up/down) - it has been that way for many years.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I've yet to see anything on YouTube which even approaches TV quality.
> 
> You did find a video that supports HD resolutions, and switch YouTube to 
> use that resolution, and watch full-screen?  Search "1080p demo" to 
> easily find some.

The ones with an HD option look bettER, but still not particularly good. 
At least, the ones I've seen.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> When do you think that day will be?
> 
> Not only is it here. It's a commodity.
> 
> http://www.netflix.com/NetflixReadyDevices

I don't follow.

Post a reply to this message