[SupraGuy]

Well, I'm starting on a new build. According to the Focal Calc, I'll get a 100" image at just under 11' of throw from an un-split configuration with a 10.6" panel and a standard triplet. This only a slightly shorter throw than my 17"/pro setup, and it's widescreen, so the overall effect will be, I think, similar.

Parts so far:

• 10.6" LCD kit from Johnzo1995 group buy.
  
• LL/Vue 400W ballast
  
• Double ended 6500K lamp kit
  
• LL 12V fans (2)
  
• LL wiring kit
  
• LL Pro reflector
  
• LL Standard lens and fresnel set, recovered from my cardboard and duct tape test setup.

This is likely going to be another more or less standard straight shooter, but I might reconsider. There will definitely be some changes from the regular "dog coffin" approach, since I have some goals in mind for this build.

I want to be able to pack this projector into my car, for portability. This projector should be able to go to a friend's place to watch movies elsewhere. In fact this may be it's primary duty, since I already have high def at home.

As such, the carpentry will be designed around lightweight construction, with some emphasis on durability and rigidity. This means goodbye, MDF.

The focus mechanism needs to be more flexible than I've normally done, since there will be a wider range of focal distances that I'll be using. I have access to a somewhat portable 80" 4:3 screen, so that's likely to be the screen most often used.

At this stage, I'm thinking of a mini-Haas type design. I'll probably go angular, rather than curved, because I don't have the fancy CNC to work with. Angular also gives me more options with the focusing department. Given the high lumens success that I experienced with my pro lens projector, I want to design this unit with a similar focal mechanism. I'll have to elaborate on it somewhat, so that I can make adjustments faster and easier, however, I'm confident that I can do so without changing the basic concept.

Also stealing from my pro lens design, I'll be using a similar light box. I may change this up some for thermal design reasons, since I'm not entirely happy with the thermal design of my pro lens projector, but I like the concept, and I think it works well.

I'm considering a folded design as well, but first I want to make a mock-up of this one to see how it will fit.

[BIMPtacular]

cant wait to see what you come up with.....i know it wil be interesting

[greymalkin]

yessss..i feel you man..i'm going to build one based on that panel as well..i've already got all the standard parts so I'm anxious to see what you come up with..i also did the ugly box the first time around, but this time I'm going to do an adaptation of sj's art deco box. I can make it look alot better than box 1 and it's alot simpler with the modular design. I can use the rail system to adjust the light/sled/triplet boxes to my hearts content.

[pun15her]

Wow,welcome aboard Supra!
This train is getting really packed really fast.
Great news,Its easy to see why people are interested in this panel ithas to be a big step foreward for us all in diy terms.
Cheers P

[ziggy_man]

Good luck with your projector!!
the 10.6 inch panel has become a great part of projectors as it brings our projectors closer to commercial than ever before.

[scoodidabop]

What's the big deal about the 10.4? Is it more transmissive or something? Sorry for the tangent Supraguy

[greymalkin]

scoodidabop, on Feb 15 2007, 02:20 PM, said:

What's the big deal about the 10.4? Is it more transmissive or something? Sorry for the tangent Supraguy

where do i begin:

1) It's smaller so you can have a smaller box than the standard 15" kit (15" is 12"x12", this is 5.5"x9")
2) It's full 720p which is higher res than the 15".
3) You can use the standard lens set and actually have corner to corner focus and much more even brightness.
4) It comes with many common inputs (composite/component/s-video/vga/dvi)
5) The price isn't too terrible ($260)
6) Although it doesn't change the throw of your triplet, it does make the picture smaller, allowing you to move the projector further back.
7) It has a smaller dot pitch by design so you can sit closer without noticing screen door.

that's all I can think of for now...

[Brilliant Farmer]

Waiting to see pictures of what you come up with.

Why the unsplit design or did I misunderstand?

Hope to do the same someday

cheers

[SupraGuy]

Wow. So many questions... But tangents are welcome, this isn't likely to be a very linear PLOG anyway.

The 10.6" panel doesn't change the throw of hte LENS, but it does change the throw of hte projector as a whole. In this case, for a 100" projected image, the projector will be just a bit under 11' away from the screen. For my current 17" with pro lenses, the distance is just a bit more than 11', so the throw is similar. Acually, when you scale the 17" down for 16:9 aspect ratio, it's probably a slightly LONGER throw with the 10.6" panel and standard lens than it is with a 17" panel and pro lens. Add in that it's 720p capable, and this becomes a real win for DIY builders. The overall cost isn't much different from a 17" with a pro lens, but the box size becomes so much smaller.

I'm going with the unsplit design because I won't need keystone correction. Also, as I mentioned, the design ideas that I came up with for my pro lens box seemed to work so well in terms of lumens output, that I want to see if the results are replicatable. I've done some quick calculations, and if I assume an average panel efficiency, I think I'm expecting about 200 ANSI lumens from this projector.

This is because of the one DISADVANTAGE to a smaller panel: Size. With a larger panel, it will 'capture' more of the light radiating from a point source. With a smaller panel, in order to capture the same amount of light, the panel would need to be closer to the lamp. Dealing with the same FL collimator fresnel, however, there's a definite limit as to how much that can be done. However with the design that I have, I can 'cheat' a bit.



I've had an idea for the panel sled. I will not be using keystone adjustment per se, but with the small size of the panel, I ought to be able to make an adjustable rig which will do an effective lens shift. This will allow me to raise or lower the projected image by a fair amount.

[yoshuaspawn]

Supra,
also glad to see you aboard the 10.6 express

As it stands now, i think Pun is in the guinea-pig slot for total polar replacement.
I have stripped the 2 film mirror layer from the back, but i want to get into a test-bed mode with some smaller lampage then my current 575w rig before i remove any other layers.

This brings up 2 questions i was curious to get your take on.
1) What are your initial thoughts or plans for the polars?

and two-parter,

2) Are you sticking with 400w because you have obtained such good results in general with your rig?
furthermore, do you see any possible downsides to a 400w source with the 10.6 (energy& heat aside, just in terms of image quality)
I ask because im really on the fence about lamp size, so i look forward to your adventures and insight while testing your initial line-up of parts
yoshyspawny

[ziggy_man]

I'm going to be using a 400w to. I think that the only down side is the big bulb ( the bulb is bigger than the lcd). I think that you would mainly just need to find a different reflector (if you use one) as it would have a different size to focus on. (I might be wrong so please fix if wrong )

[-=Shiver=-]

Goodluck man!! looking fowward to the progress as i am doing a similar build.

"unsplit doesn't use keystone correction" ???
It was my understanding that the only reason you would do a split design is to have the front fresnel slightly agled for keystone correction.

[SupraGuy]

@yoshua:

1. If it ain't broke... Initially, I'm going to leave the panel alone. Once I'm done with that, I will consider removing the "mirrored" layers, but the front polariser, I'm going to leave that alone. Experience has taught me that leaving those layers alone is insurance for the panel. If I'd done an AG strip on my samsung right away, the scratch in the AG would have been a very serious matter indeed. I consider it a protective layer on the panel. Since there are 2 such layers, I'll entertain the thought of stripping one, once the projector is up and running. Before that, I'm going to leave them alone.

2. I already have a 400W lamp, socket and ballast. It's a small form factor double-ended lamp, which seems to be perfect for the job. Why wouldn't I use it? If I had one of the 150W ceramic lamps and appropriate ballast, I'd consider that as well, but I have yet to see raw lumen numbers for those that might indicate superior performance. Also, since I have the 220mm and 317mm fresnel lenses already, this becomes a simple solution with known results. I think that I can look forward to very even projection lighting with this setup.

@Shiver:

Unsplit doesn't have keystone correction, is what I mean. Because the front fresnel can't be tilted to adjust for it. But with the smaller panel, I will be able to use lens shifting (Or, more accurately PANEL shifting) to move the projected image. The projector still needs to be perpendicular to the screen, but I will be able to adjust the height of hte projected image by moving the panel up or down by a couple of inches. As such, I will be able to have the effect of keystone correction. Since I know that the standard lens can focus a 15" panel, that gives me quite a bit of lattitude with the location of the 10" panel for offset projection.

[cpsubrian]

SupraGuy, on Feb 15 2007, 02:57 PM, said:

Unsplit doesn't have keystone correction, is what I mean. Because the front fresnel can't be tilted to adjust for it. But with the smaller panel, I will be able to use lens shifting (Or, more accurately PANEL shifting) to move the projected image. The projector still needs to be perpendicular to the screen, but I will be able to adjust the height of hte projected image by moving the panel up or down by a couple of inches. As such, I will be able to have the effect of keystone correction. Since I know that the standard lens can focus a 15" panel, that gives me quite a bit of lattitude with the location of the 10" panel for offset projection.

Excellent idea for some shifting without the front fres in the way.. but... doesn't this eat away at one of the most important ( i would say THE most important) features of using this panel: a smaller box?

[SupraGuy]

Yes, it does increase the overall box size, but only by a couple of inches in height. The design that I'm sketching out only has about 3/4" of travel for the LCD plane, so the increase in size is fairly minimal.

Then again, with the intended porability of the projector, It's more than possible that I'll just forego the adjustability... It depends on the final dimenions of my light box, which I'll start on this weekend.

[greymalkin]

SupraGuy, on Feb 15 2007, 11:57 PM, said:

Since I know that the standard lens can focus a 15" panel, that gives me quite a bit of lattitude with the location of the 10" panel for offset projection.

*MOST* of the panel, that is...you will always have focus/brightness loss on the extreme corners of the 15" panel with the standard triplet. The 10.6 however is about 50% as tall and 75% as wide as the 15" so you get bright/sharp goodness....that's a cool idea about shifting the lcd panel.

This post has been edited by greymalkin: 16 February 2007 - 05:25 PM

[SupraGuy]

I had perfect corner to corner focus on my standard lens 15" build. I realsise that some members have had issues, but I did not. Therefore I maintain that it is possible to have such focus without issues.

I'm not alone in this, either. Several members have had perfect corner to corner focus on their 15" standard lens builds as well. Build quality, alignment, and keystone correction all play a role in the quality of the focus possible for this lens.

Also, the length/width are not the issue. The distance from the centre point of the lens is. 15" means 7.5" from the centre whether the panel is 4:3 or 16:9.

[SupraGuy]

Well, I spent most of yesterday reorganizing the basement.

I 'found' some more throw for the projector, so now my screen is up to the 120" mark. I don't think that I want it any larger than this, but hey... big is good.

I'm playing with box ideas for hte 10.6. A folded path is tempting, considering that I want to make this projector portable, but I think that I'll stick with the straight path. There's something to be said for simplicity, and besides, I don't have my FS mirror anymore.

[greymalkin]

SupraGuy, on Feb 16 2007, 06:05 PM, said:

I had perfect corner to corner focus on my standard lens 15" build. I realsise that some members have had issues, but I did not. Therefore I maintain that it is possible to have such focus without issues.

I'm not alone in this, either. Several members have had perfect corner to corner focus on their 15" standard lens builds as well. Build quality, alignment, and keystone correction all play a role in the quality of the focus possible for this lens.

Well my box is pretty shoddy...and for movies/games focus is much more easily attained than with windows text so it's not really a deal breaker. Rather than wade through 100's of of posts to see differing views on how to get that perfect corner to corner focus I'd rather just take the lazy way out and get the 10.6" panel .

SupraGuy, on Feb 16 2007, 06:05 PM, said:

Also, the length/width are not the issue. The distance from the centre point of the lens is. 15" means 7.5" from the centre whether the panel is 4:3 or 16:9.

ok now you're splitting hairs Everyone knows the lcd panel is to be centered on the triplet, so with this basic principle in mind there's no need to speak of it in "distance from the center"...the length/width by design is going to be 2x the distance from the center. Of course it could be moved off axis but that was not the premise of the situation being described.

now i will poop on your thread no more unless I have something nice or constructive to say

[SupraGuy]

@greymalkin: No problem. I have no trouble with people commenting. The way to get perfect corner to corner focus is simple. Make sure that the len and LCD are properly aligned.

Okay, simple in principle, much harder in real life.

And no, I don't think that it is splitting hairs, because I see many references to people saying that you can't get a 15.4" widescreen to focus the corners because it's wider than a 4:3 screen.

Rubbish. The widescreen is wider than the standard screen, yes, But it's shorter. The corners aren't 7.7" from the primary axis instead of 7.5" (Because of a slightly larger diagonal size, NOT because of the width) which I don't think would make enough difference to affect focus that much.

[SupraGuy]

In other news...

My 10.6" panel is here. Yay! Pictures of components coming soon, as soon as I find the USB cable to my camera...

[Durachko]

SupraGuy, on Feb 22 2007, 03:24 PM, said:

as soon as I find the USB cable to my camera...

Check under your new panel.

[greymalkin]

I'm interested in seeing just how much lens/panel shifting you can do with the standard triplet and the 10.6" panel. one day when I build my 10.6" I want to hug it close to the ceiling and shift the lens down a bit so the top of the screen is at the top of my wall.

I hung my 15" up last night and I had to hang it almost in the middle of the room (at the back of the room I got terrible screen door) and also had to hang it about shoulder high to keep from getting nasty keystoning. It looks good now when sitting along the back wall but now I've got this huge ugly eye sore looming above. The 15" with standard lens is really REALLY impractical for my purposes but the 10.6 will make it all better.

[SupraGuy]

As to "how much lens shift"

The width of the new panel is only a little more than the height of a standard 15" LCD. The height of the new panel is pretty much half of the height of a standard 15" panel.

That means that with appropriate fresnels, it should be, in theory, possible to lens shift the projector such that the projector's principal axis passes through the bottom center of the panel, and thus the top of the screen (Or bottom of the screen) is level with the center of the projection lens.

Of course doing so will only be possible with an exceptional high quality build, and will require a colledtor fresnel larger than the LL standard lens.

In practice, however, I think that I would limit the amount of lens shift to about 2" from center. This is at about the limits of using the standard LL fresnelsand produces a satisfactorily large offset. This would still, for example, allow the projector to be suspended from the ceiling, though it's unlikely that you'd be able to walk under it.

As for the location of a standard 15" projector... Yeah, I found that the placement for the 15" put it at about the same distance as where I wanted to sit, if not in front of the seating position. Very inconvenient.

The 10.6" panel will increase the throw of the standard lenses enough to make this work really well, and the options of lens shifting can make the placement of the projector far more flexible.

[SupraGuy]

As promised, a picture.

This is the double-ended 400W 6500K lamp, next to the 10.6" LCD as a comparison. It seems that this lamp will mount in the same overall width, which means that there will be no trouble whatsoever making this fit in the box with the 10.6" panel.
 lampscreen.jpg (251.58K)
Number of downloads: 53

I've left the taped on clear piece on the LCD for now. I don't know if I'll strip the AG layer on this LCD, though the "mirrored" layers on the back are certainly fair game. I do, after all want to have a nice bright projection. I'm not going to go for a polariser replacement, that's more than I want to do. I definitely have limits on my personal DIY ambition.