[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: I said I wouldn't...
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: I said I wouldn't...
- From: "Kenneth Watt" <kennwatt@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 18:59:54 +0100
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Andy,
You've no chance mate!
The LCD in an LCD projection system is a totally different beast to that
in an LCD screen. I've seen allsorts of guff in my time like ideas to
make a CRT into a projector, image enhancers and magnifiers but I have
never even heard of anyone attempting something like this simply because
it is not a viable proposition.
IMO, the picture if you could see it, would be so washed out it would be
un-watchable and that's if you could sort out the physical problems with
the original LCD screen.
The best advise I can give you is to start saving!
K.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Laurence [mailto:andylaurence@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 19 October 2001 18:41
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ukha_d] I said I wouldn't...
>=20
> << The beam of light to project a moving image is a very tight
focused
> beam, passed through an LCD panel about an inch square to a very high
> quality lens to focus on a screen. >>
>=20
> Yup, understand that.
>=20
> << An overhead projector is a magnified view of a broad beam of
light
that
> is compressed by a lens, flipped, magnified in another lens then
beamed
> to the screen. >>
>=20
> That too.
>=20
> << Overhead projector =3D =A3400 - LCD projector =A31000 and
upwards - CR=
T
> projector =3D =A34500 an upwards. Most of the cost is in the lens and
to =
a
> degree the electronics. >>
>=20
> I understand that quality would be seriously lacking, but I can't
afford
> =A31000 let alone =A34500. I can afford =A3200 for a cheap TFT screen
an=
d
=A350
> for
> a cheap OHP. It'd be nice to have something 6 feet high rather than
the
> 28"
> screen I have at the moment.
>=20
> <<Although similar in principal they are in fact very different
systems,
> sorry if that's bad news but I would say that this would be nigh on
> impossible to achieve.>>
>=20
> Are you saying the principle is flawed or are you saying quality would
be
> bad?
>=20
> Cheers for the feedback,
>=20
> Andy
>=20
>=20
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>=20
>=20
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>=20
> For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subscribe: ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe: ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
> List owner: ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>=20
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>=20
For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk=20
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx=20
Subscribe: ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx=20
Unsubscribe: ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx=20
List owner: ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx=20
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/=20
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|