REDray Projector..

[Jarred Land]

Can you give any specific recommendation for a prefect screen gain/type/brand?! We're looking into building a new color correction room based on the projector, so we want everything to be perfect once you release it

I would wait on that one

 

[Alex Kiritz]

So how's this going to work? Seems like at most you could just sell Red branded high quality screens at a much lower price similar to how the current lenses are sold. I'd imagine cost cutting on a piece of fabric is a lot easier than with a brand new projector.

 

[Jonathan McGuire]

I would wait on that one

Jarred, is there any possibility of using spectral filters in the future since the laser source looks to be external? I know lasers can have problems with these type of filters since most work on a single line of spectrum, but there seems to be ways to make this work. The guy who designs the filters for Omega 3D that Runco uses said he would be happy to work with RED to make custom dichroic filter system. Even if this meant purchasing two laser engines I would be all for it!

 

[L. Langer]

I would wait on that one

You're only allowed to say "heh heh heh". :ihih:

 

[Michael Kobb]

Yes, I was told that it requires a silver screen and that the one used in the demo is a Stewart screen with 2.0 gain.

Well, I have to say, that's terribly disappointing. Although I really congratulate Red for the achievement that this projector represents, I'm afraid it just went from the top of my list to the "not an option" list.

It may be that there was no better option for passive 3D with a laser light source, but silver screens are really a problem in home theater applications, where their performance for 2D material doesn't compare very well with a white screen. So, if I wanted to use this projector in my home theater, I would have to install a second, silver screen that could drop instead of my white screen, and either ensure that the projector's focus was broad enough to cover both screens, or manually refocus the projector when using 3D. And, I would have to change the equalization of my center channel speaker depending upon which screen was down, since my primary screen is a woven screen, and the only options I'm aware of that retain polarization are vinyl screens with perforations, which require very different EQ.

Plus that's now a substantial extra expense that really hurts the projector's price point. Even if somebody is willing to change screens, you've added thousands of dollars to the cost for anybody wanting to install your projector in an existing theater.

I've seen the Stewart screen you were using (elsewhere, not at NAB), and I didn't like it at all.

I would encourage the folks from Red to take two things into consideration when bringing this machine to the home theater space:

1. Do whatever it takes to make the projector quiet. It looks from the photos as if your light source is in the offboard box. If that's true, that should be a big help, because that heat source and its cooling fan can be placed in a remote location. I'd suggest that you go pick up a Sony VPL-VW95ES. It's extremely quiet even though its light source is internal. You should be able to beat the sound levels from that projector with your external light source. Many home theaters can't install a projection booth or a "hush box", and at your price range, you're targeting home theaters that don't want that level of complexity. If your machine is noisier than other options, you will lose sales. I passed up a much more expensive projector with a stellar image because it was too noisy for my theater.
2. Consider also supporting active 3D with shutter glasses, for those users who will not be able to use a silver screen. If you can really do 120Hz passive 3D with 120Hz to both eyes, you should be able to do really really good active 3D. This could make the projector into a superb option for those of us for whom 3D is not the main focus, but who do want to be able to do the occasional 3D screening.

 

[Espen Jensen]

So what is the chance of RED making an appearance at Infocomm? I know it's not NAB, but it would be my only chance to see it live! Besides.. it would be nice for people in the installed AV industry to be able to compare this to the Sony/Christie/BARCO/DP equipment on site.

 

[Tommy Kristensen]

Will the projector come as a "complete package" - ready to use - REDray projector, Lens, REDplayer etc. - everything but the screen? Or would you have to add some stuff?

 

[James Kirst]

You only need a silver screen for front projected 3D... If you only plan on using our Laser projector for 2D.. a white screen is fine.

And remember.. since we are shooting 24 foot lamberts you don't need it to be high gain. A higher gain screen improves the effects of polarization but also gets into all sorts of other issues like hotspots etc.

You guys that saw it yesterday should come see it again today.. we made some substantial improvements late in the wee hours today

You guys are so close to WORLD DOMINATION!!!

 

[paulherrin]

Well, I have to say, that's terribly disappointing. Although I really congratulate Red for the achievement that this projector represents, I'm afraid it just went from the top of my list to the "not an option" list.

It may be that there was no better option for passive 3D with a laser light source, but silver screens are really a problem in home theater applications, where their performance for 2D material doesn't compare very well with a white screen. So, if I wanted to use this projector in my home theater, I would have to install a second, silver screen that could drop instead of my white screen, and either ensure that the projector's focus was broad enough to cover both screens, or manually refocus the projector when using 3D. And, I would have to change the equalization of my center channel speaker depending upon which screen was down, since my primary screen is a woven screen, and the only options I'm aware of that retain polarization are vinyl screens with perforations, which require very different EQ.

Plus that's now a substantial extra expense that really hurts the projector's price point. Even if somebody is willing to change screens, you've added thousands of dollars to the cost for anybody wanting to install your projector in an existing theater.

I've seen the Stewart screen you were using (elsewhere, not at NAB), and I didn't like it at all.

I would encourage the folks from Red to take two things into consideration when bringing this machine to the home theater space:

1. Do whatever it takes to make the projector quiet. It looks from the photos as if your light source is in the offboard box. If that's true, that should be a big help, because that heat source and its cooling fan can be placed in a remote location. I'd suggest that you go pick up a Sony VPL-VW95ES. It's extremely quiet even though its light source is internal. You should be able to beat the sound levels from that projector with your external light source. Many home theaters can't install a projection booth or a "hush box", and at your price range, you're targeting home theaters that don't want that level of complexity. If your machine is noisier than other options, you will lose sales. I passed up a much more expensive projector with a stellar image because it was too noisy for my theater.
2. Consider also supporting active 3D with shutter glasses, for those users who will not be able to use a silver screen. If you can really do 120Hz passive 3D with 120Hz to both eyes, you should be able to do really really good active 3D. This could make the projector into a superb option for those of us for whom 3D is not the main focus, but who do want to be able to do the occasional 3D screening.

install silver, drop white. set focus marks if it's going soft. do you really have another option for something more affordable at this level of performance? are there any other projectors in existence with this level of performance? what's the real problem?

 

[Jonathan McGuire]

install silver, drop white. set focus marks if it's going soft. do you really have another option for something more affordable at this level of performance? are there any other projectors in existence with this level of performance? what's the real problem?

The problem is spectral 3D is better than polarized, better extinction and no need for a silver screen. This may be something that could not be done under 10k with lasers or may have cut brightness too much. If the native CR on this projector ends up on par with JVC HT projectors then this is still a major home run, I just would have liked to seen them go with a different 3D tech.

 

[Michael Kobb]

install silver, drop white. set focus marks if it's going soft. do you really have another option for something more affordable at this level of performance? are there any other projectors in existence with this level of performance? what's the real problem?

The problem is that in my installation, I am already using a motorized screen. A screen that, by the way, cost about as much as this projector. I doubt that I have enough room in the soffit for a second motorized screen. This is a home, not a commercial venue. The existing screen is motorized because it drops in front of a bookcase (which also happens to contain the center speaker) so that the room isn't dominated by a giant screen when it's being used for 2-channel listening or reading or whatever. So, a fixed screen with a second motorized screen that drops in front is not an option.

As well, the current screen uses a masking system. For good masking performance, the masks need to be as close to the screen surface as possible. With two screens, one screen will suffer.

The entire theater is automated. Shades, lighting, screen drop, screen masking. Aspect ratio adjustments are automatic depending upon cues from the movie server. So, to this fully automated theater, I need to add a step to get up and walk over to the projector and tweak the focus ring depending upon type of content? With infrequent 3D viewing, that really honestly probably fine for me since my projector location is easy to access. It'd be a problem in some installations though (perhaps it's built into a soffit, for example, as several folks I know have theirs).

I'm not saying that there are better options at this price point. There aren't. The only 4K alternative I'm aware of that's even remotely close is the Sony VPL-VW1000ES, which is $24,999 MSRP, can't do 4K at anything more than 24p, and is not as bright.

So, like I said, I really congratulate Red on what sounds like an amazing and groundbreaking product, but it's really unfortunate that it requires a special screen. This may seem like a non-issue to people who really don't do much home theater, but if you take a stroll over to some of the home theater forums, there's growing disappointment because this requirement rules the projector out for a lot of people.

As I suggested above, Red could remove this objection by offering an option to use active glasses. That opens up all other screen surfaces and allows people who have a big investment in their existing rooms to exchange the projector without an expensive and disruptive replacement of the screen.

[Edit: Plus what Jonathan said. :smiley:]

 

[Michel Hafner]

As I suggested above, Red could remove this objection by offering an option to use active glasses. That opens up all other screen surfaces and allows people who have a big investment in their existing rooms to exchange the projector without an expensive and disruptive replacement of the screen.
[Edit: Plus what Jonathan said. :smiley:]

I'm all for that as well. Either active variant or passive that works with regular non polarity preserving screens. I have a woven accoustically transparent screen and won't replace it with a silver screen with holes in it. A second screen does not fit in well and would not be masked. So either it's no Red projector or 2 projectors, one for 2D (possibly the RED) and one for 3D (not the RED with current options). I'd much prefer one projector to two, though.

 

[paulherrin]

everybody already knew it was going to be a passive system... i stand by that decision.

 

[Michael Kobb]

You are arguing that you approve of the approach Red has taken. Some of the rest of us are pointing out that the approach doesn't work for us, and offering constructive suggestions for things that Red could do to make the product more broadly successful.

 

[Jonathan McGuire]

everybody already knew it was going to be a passive system... i stand by that decision.

Yes they did, and passive with simultaneous L/R 3D is amazing, but use spectral 3D instead of polarization and you have the perfect system that doesn't require anyone to change their screen. I don't think anyone is bashing RED, but there are those of us joining the community from AVSforum that are very picky about our home theater projectors. It seems like RED has a real winner here with an amazing price, hopefully in the future we will see them offer Omega spectral 3D filters as an option.

 

[paulherrin]

sorry for being a bit snarky. i'm sure they're listening, you guys bring up some good points. i just don't think you need to feel let down simply because you may have added expenses for screen installation... seems pretty well worthy of compromise to me.

i don't know much about spectral 3d, anyone care to elaborate in detail?

 

[Greg M]

Yes they did, and passive with simultaneous L/R 3D is amazing, but use spectral 3D instead of polarization and you have the perfect system that doesn't require anyone to change their screen. I don't think anyone is bashing RED, but there are those of us joining the community from AVSforum that are very picky about our home theater projectors. It seems like RED has a real winner here with an amazing price, hopefully in the future we will see them offer Omega spectral 3D filters as an option.

All valid points, as screens can cost as much as some projectors. The good news is Red listens, so hopefully its not too late to consider all options to make REDRay Projector even better.

 

[Les Dittert]

Hard (impossible) to get monochrome laser light sources to work with Omega spectral 3D filters, as there is only one frequency of light for each color.
just sayin.

 

[Jonathan McGuire]

sorry for being a bit snarky. i'm sure they're listening, you guys bring up some good points. i just don't think you need to feel let down simply because you may have added expenses for screen installation... seems pretty well worthy of compromise to me.

i don't know much about spectral 3d, anyone care to elaborate in detail?

Dolby and Panavision use spectral filters in their 3D projection, the filters are developed by Infitec and Omega. "The filters transmit narrows bands of red, green, and blue for the left eye, and slightly different bands of red, green, and blue for the right eye. A discerning eye might notice a very slight difference in color between the two images, but the brain doesn't care, easily integrating the two into natural color." That quote came from an article that I will link to if you wish to read more. The great thing about spectral 3D is that it doesn't require a silver screen and eliminates ghosting (or is at least that best solution for dealing with it). The downside is that the glasses are reflecting the image that is not meant to be seen by each eye, and if you have ambient light in your theater you may notice the reflections on the lens, you can see what I mean in the picture below. Lasers may make it hard to use these filters since they usually operate on a single line of spectrum, but the designer of the Omega filters has stated on avsforum that it can be done. Don't get me wrong though, I love what RED is doing and simultaneous L/R 3D is more important to me that the fact they are using polarization. If they have a screen in the works than can eliminate ghosting and still look good in 2D then I will be ecstatic. I even have a pair of oakley 3D glasses left from when I used polarization with a dual projection polarized setup.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/14/stereo2.htm

 

[Jonathan McGuire]

Hard (impossible) to get monochrome laser light sources to work with Omega spectral 3D filters, as there is only one frequency of light for each color.
just sayin.

Thats what I have been hearing, and I believe you 100%, but the designer of the Omega filters has posted on avs some opinions on how it can be done. "You are right most lasers work a a single line of spectrum. you would need ten lines to match what were doing. not practical really, but there are ways of getting multiple lines out of some laser setups. there are tunable lasers and some gain mediums that extend the bands. all kinds of ways to make a wider spectrum. diode lasers are also a possiblity with being tunable and packing many bands. i wasnt thinking of the current offering so much as just the idea of using a dochroic as opposed to polorizers. could be with dolby you would need 6 lines but one would still have the color issues their system has. also if the laser is exciting a phosphore to create the source then all these things would work."

would it also be possible to combine two laser light engines that each work on a different line of spectrum? I know that would drive the price up but I'm curious if that is a solution?