 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:24:29 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> 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.
Yeah, something similar with our ceiling mount.
> 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?
Wow - I assume 1st class seating, not coach. ;-)
And fire? Sounds like a story....
>> 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.
Oh, true, and I wish I'd done Ethernet while we were in the walls.
>> 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. :-)
Yeah, we did blackout fabric on the windows (attached with velcro,
actually), so we run the lamp at low power, generally gives us a good
picture unless we've got the windows open. But I went in and watched Law
& Order: Criminal Intent during lunch today (oh the joy of working from
home), and I didn't bother putting the shade up on the south window -
kinad overcast today anyways.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 07:50:02 -0400, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Are there any cinemas in existence that aren't? (Discounting perhaps
> some home-made cinemas in some poor countries showing pirated movies
> from VHS...)
I wouldn't think so, since the cameras used in moviemaking are all
widescreen of some sort (anamorphic, 16:9, or some other variation).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:02:54 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> 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.
Netflix streaming video service. I use it myself, generally get good
results over a 3 Mbps (down) DSL connection.
Or hulu.com. Or BBC iPlayer for that matter.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:35:30 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:
> On 4/27/2010 8:15 PM, Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> On 04/27/10 07:57, Mike Raiford wrote:
>>> Whats not to follow? They stream movies directly from the internet
>>> (albeit at SD resolutions ..)
>>
>> Depends on how you define SD - I've seen movies through it that
are
>> definitely beyond DVD quality.
>>
>>
> I think the resolution actually tops out somewhere around 720x480. Their
> STB only supports the SD mode, though it may be progressive scan, or it
> could be that you have a high enough bandwidth connection that you're
> getting less compression.
>
> What I have seen does indeed rival DVD in terms of picture quality,
> though.
It does; we stream from Netflix to our PS3, resolution isn't bad often
times (depends on the congestion on the network). The other day I
watched Chaplin because I'd never seen it - a few places the picture
quality dropped out, but it was definitely watchable. They only do
stereo sound, though, which was annoying (what with a 7.1 system in the
room).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:18:21 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> Again, that's all very nice. But unless you have insane levels of
> bandwidth available, it's not going to work.
3 Mbps isn't "insane" by today's standards. It's what I've got, and the
Netflix streaming works. Did I mention I project the image on a 9'
diagonal screen?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:10:43 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>
>> besides game consoles, many people for the past few years have been
>> connecting computers to their large screen FullHD TVs. Because, you
>> know, it's usually more pleasing seeing images at a large screen from
>> the comfort of your sofa (yeah, with a wireless keyboard) rather than
>> sitting a few inches away from a much smaller screen.
>
> Not if you're a programmer... although admittedly few people are.
Has nothing to do with being a programmer. I know quite a few
professional software engineers who have home cinema setups to watch
movies, and far prefer that over watching in front of their computer
screen.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Wow - I assume 1st class seating, not coach. ;-)
Coach, actually. But now that you mention it, I have to wonder why.
> And fire? Sounds like a story....
Not much of a story. 1985, house caught on fire while we weren't home, got
home, no people hurt, pets dead, expensive and annoying to repair thing.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:15:40 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Wow - I assume 1st class seating, not coach. ;-)
>
> Coach, actually. But now that you mention it, I have to wonder why.
Weird....
>> And fire? Sounds like a story....
>
> Not much of a story. 1985, house caught on fire while we weren't home,
> got home, no people hurt, pets dead, expensive and annoying to repair
> thing.
:-( Sorry to hear that (I know, it was a long time ago, but loss of home
and pets is a bad memory).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/28/10 06:35, Mike Raiford wrote:
> I think the resolution actually tops out somewhere around 720x480. Their
> STB only supports the SD mode, though it may be progressive scan, or it
> could be that you have a high enough bandwidth connection that you're
> getting less compression.
I'm guessing bandwidth. Speakeasy claims 25 Mb/s, although in practice
it's always lower. I get download rates exceeding 1.5 MB/s (bytes).
--
I considered atheism but there weren't enough holidays.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> You know that pitch perception is logarithmic, right?
>
> She was still off by 10x as much as I was. Things that sounded the same
> were a good semitone or even full tone different.
That's quite impressive...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
