Still a little over simplified and some of the finer points of explanation are off, but you got the gist, the main benefit is increase in brightness and contrast processing, since the projector doesn't have to worry about that hard black line for black control which is helpful, using all your available pixels for light output does make a difference. Whether you increase your pixel density or resolution has a content component though. If your source is either cropped or letterboxed 2.35, you aren't gaining any pixels, you're just scaling it up to utilize more light, then scaling it back down to not be distorted, at best it's a quick up sample, and you'll either not notice it, or maybe get a slightly less noisy image as a result, really though it should look about the same from a detail perspective. cropped/letterboxed 4k still has the same pixel density in the retained image area regardless of what aspect ratio it's being shown on, horizontal doesn't change, what changes is the number of vertical pixels, not their distance apart or anything. If you took 2.35 and stretched it 16:9 and kept it there, you actually get less pixel density. The only time you would lose pixels and resolution though, still not really density is if you had pre stretched anamorphic content, which dvd used to do, I honestly don't know about blu-ray media, (I assume it's possible some do that, but of the ones I've looked at it's all letterboxed 16:9, so those pixels you are "losing" are already gone, hard coded black) where the image is actually rendered in a 16:9 aspect, distorting it vertically but taking up all the pixel resolution possible, and where a DCR stretches it out horizontal to correct it back to normal, vs the player keeping the horizontal dimension and adding black bars top and bottom to correct the aspect, squishing it and dropping your detail and resolution. Seams like for DVD it made sense with so few pixels to work with they needed all the information they could manage, but since UHD especially has the pixels to spare, it's fine, also more efficient codecs (and way higher bit rates) where encoding the letterbox isn't wasting sufficient bits to matter. So in short yes, extracting more brightness, which is important, and helping the projector extract more detail without having big black areas to worry about preserving (wider open iris perhaps?) but to say you are losing pixel density or resolution, let alone getting it back after from a lens isn't accurate and kind of misleading, or at least a misunderstanding (or oversimplification) of how the media is presented and encoded. What I still don't really understand is how it presents 16:9 content with it in place. Does it squish it horizontally to maintain aspect ratio without a stretch (introducing side black bars) or are you forced to watch 16:9 stretched horizontal to fill the screen? I mean the DCR lens has a fixed distortion, so it isn't going to manage native 16:9 vs 2:35 any different, it can't tell the difference anyway, it's just a lens. And if you add a system to mechanically move the dcr in and out of the path, well, thats even higher end and more money. I assume this is where the Lumagin comes in, to detect native aspect and distort as needed for the desired fill.

@maxbaumann9724

2 жыл бұрын

16:9 image require a 4:3 video output. manually via projector or automatically via a external video processor (i.e. lumagen)

What about movies that goes between both ratios? The Dark knight rises, Transformers etc.

@chuckolson5219

Жыл бұрын

get a madVR with the DCR. there is no other way to properly handle this issue

Great explination Chris and thanks for taking the time to do this!

I love my DCR though I’m pretty sensitive to barrel distortion so I’m going to also pick up a ISCO IIIL since it’s pincushion distortion. Best combo yet is still a DCR and Lumagen by far. Using it on my Stewart screen with RS3000 and it’s sooo good.

Great video keep up the good work,it was worth the info thks.

Thanks 4 t video I keep looking at getting one of these lenses

Greatinfo Chris I sent out a message a while back about explaining me what the difference were with the anamorphic lens from 235 to 16 by 9 now I know I don't have to take the lens off to get 16 by 9 to keep it on and get 235

Great content. And this guy from dream media team is the most knowledgeable and best presenter

Oh I did the real thing when projectionist flipping the w/s over to scope and it is a lot more than that, that has to be done in less than 10 seconds. trailer ends in w/s - feature is scope - close the doser or fade light off on the film mute sound on Dolby CP - open masking to scope - change the aperture plate from w/s to scope - flip w/s l flat lens over to scope - keeping eye on the blank film because behind it is the main feature - sound format needs to be switched from format 04 to format 10 - keeping hand on the doser and waiting till main feature enters the film gate then slowly fade the doser, light up onto the film and unmute sound on Dolby CP and slowly turn fader up to 6.5 (oh seems all you lot ain't gonna have it at Ref 85, cos mostly no cinema never often plays a film at Ref level) - focus on bbfc then wait till actual film is on screen and if needs focus again then focus it on any opening credit text for sharpness. Now go onto the next screen and get it threaded and laced up. also these home theatre lens is a rip off. an actual scope lens is so cheap on ebay and all you need is the lens optic and fit into a new simple wooden housing to place in front of the projector when it is set at 4:3 stretched vertically with very little black bars. In fact there are black bars or rack lines for scope they are so thin. w/s has thicker black rack lines but the aperture plate on the 35/70 hides or masks it as it just a metal thin plate that slides horizontally in/out between the film gate one for scope the other for w/s, which is common another aperture plate for academy ratio or 1:33:1 will be kept in store room as it is so rarely used. so everyone don't get ripped off on these home theaatre anamorphic lenses, just go ebay look for 35mm scope lens some are often less than £ $ 100 there will be silly greedy people asking few grand but truth is those lenses are no longer used anymore only few handful of 35/70 cinemas are still around now the tens of thousands of other 35mm only have rubbish 4k tv projection. I have a russian anamorphic lens that was £65.00 that is how cheap they are now. and I will never be caught playing any marvel rubbish movie disc in my home. I hardly now buy any new movie or even bother now to watch for free any new movie now. I just play the older ones that still look new cos there is no wear on the disc and I rather look at a movie with scratches and blemishes over some rubbish 4k scan that has DNR EE degrained plastered all over it with botched colour and botched Near Field atmos re-mix that has no dynamic range and has frequency filtering reducing bass slam bass kick bass depth. I'm done with 4k as 4k is a Scam.

Getting a JVC nz9. Do I need or should I do a pan lens? Also looking for a new screen to pair up. I have light control total blackness but the wife likes having curtains partially open to get airflow especially in the summer.

Are you still using your Absolute black cenima 2.0? I just ordered mine a few days ago!

Damn good info! Thanks 🙏🏼 good sir

Good video. I'd like to hear a similar video explaining the lumigen. Specifically about aspect ratios. I thought I'd seen lumigen and anamorphic lenses used together.

Hey is it possible to place anamorphic Lens to a ultra short throw projector??? Have they came out with such a lens yet???

I have full hd projector viewsonic pg705 hd. Anamorphic lens need or not?

How much does this lens cost? My PJ does not have a memory setting will the DCR lens work with it? My PJ is a Benq W2700.

For Epson LS12000 or Sony xw5000 es do we need this anamorphic lens. Can anyone advice for 16:9 screen.

Would be good if you could recommend some screens with the JVC's. Didn't quite get what you were trying to say with the Black Diamond Screen.

It would be nice to demonstrate the full user experience when watching a Blu-ray disc. Perhaps demonstrate the downside of navigating a menu and then watching a widescreen format movie vs the same experience when watching a 16x9 movie. A demonstration of the actual user experience would be more valueable than a talk-thru with only a partial demonstration. And then ultimately, what options are aviable to overcome the downsides of navigating this complexity. Is there any option short of a video processor such as a Lumagen?

What do you think of the Prismasonic lenses?

What projectors would this lens work with? Will it work with for say LG’s Laser Projectors????

Thatsss what they are!! Okay, glad I don’t need that since I plan to do 16:9 screen since that’s mainly what I watch

Great video and information, however it's worth noting that the Panamorph DCR Lens is a vertical compression lens, not a horizontal expansion lens. Therefore during initial installation and setup of the lens, you need to zoom out the picture to fill your 2.40 screen with 2.40 content. There will still be black bars projecting on top and bottom of your screen, however when the lens is in place, the lens will compress the image in (Anamorphic Mode C) to give you full pixel density, resolution and light output. It will use the black bars as part of the image so you'll be getting the full 4K resolution. If you want to watch 16.9 content in its native format on your 2.35, 2.39 or 2.40 screen you do not turn the Anamorphic mode to off as that will apply stretch to the image. You actually should use Anamorphic mode D, which will give you the native 16.9 format on your scope screen. Great video overall 👍

@chuckolson5219

Жыл бұрын

i have yet to see a video about the DCR, particularly from places like Dreamedia, that I believe really understand what this lens does. none of them actually show a demo of what it is doing, i.e, the vertical compression piece of it, and it seems they all still think it is a stretch lens. I have nothing against these guys but I just get the feel they are trying to sell a product they don't understand completely. Watch all of the videos and they are all the same without any substance to what the lens is actually doing, and NEVER mention anything about it being a vertical compression lens because they would then have to explain what that is and I don't think they can at least from the impression they are giving

Any for Optoma Uhz65?

Hi Chris 👋 I have a Dell S718QL 4k short throw Projector. What do you think is the best screen for my money?

@kevinbyrd9735

3 жыл бұрын

Great video!

@andysummersthxcinemaandmyc7748

3 жыл бұрын

Russian yes the Russians did it. the Russians are doing scope lenses on ebay for £65.00 so don't be a sucker and pay silly home theatre money for silly overrated no underrated lens at overpriced that cost more than the projector, daylight robbery. and stop looking up home theatre on ebay look for professional as the prices now are ultra cheap as 35/70 has been done in by hollywood for the sake of greediness on 4k.

3:54 well duh, your 4k projector will still be showing more resolution even with the "wasted" bars vs starting with a 1080p projectors...

You don't gain resolution back. You gain brightness back. Big difference.

@chuckolson5219

Жыл бұрын

I think Panamorph should do a video that properly explains with the DCR does. These are sales pitches from dealers that don't understand entirely what they are selling.

I just bought a iscoIIIL anamorphic lens and it's the Bugatti of lenses

Does the epson 6050 need a lens?

@Dreamediaav

2 жыл бұрын

Hey! The Epson doesn’t “need” a lens as it can do the lens shift and zoom for the 2.35 and 2.40 screens. But to get the best resolution and brightness you can get the lens to bypass that. The lens though is quite expensive and may be money better spent upgrading the projector first.

Point in fact unless your projector is actually 4096x2160, you were never watching true 4K anyway, you were watching Ultra HD. There is a difference. But anyway, fact of the matter is the width of the image is STILL 3840 pixels, which is what you and almost everyone else erroneously call 4K, so you are STILL seeing your Ultra HD image. You may be missing a couple hundred lines, but unless the movie was put on the disc in anamorphic wide, all you're doing is scaling the image vertically to fill the fixed pixel grid (which never really works very well unless you're scaling 1:2 or similar) Aspect ratios are a RATIO, not a multiplication. It is not 16 by 9 unless that is the actual physical size, it is 16 "is to" 9, 16:9 is an aspect ratio, 1.78:1, 1.85:1, 2.35:1, 2.40:1, 4:3, 5:4 etc are aspect ratios, 16x9 is a size. As much as i like the videos from you and a couple of the others, i really do wish you'd get the basics correct.

Most high-end theaters without a Barco or Christie projector that have native 2.40:1 anamorphic lenses as part of the projector....I see a DCR lens being used! I bought a Paladin DCR and Lumagen and having a pro coming to calibrate it. I have a 145" 2.40:1 StudioTek Microperf screen, JVC RS1200, Paladin DCR and Lumagen Radiance Pro. I thought that was the best way to dial it all in correctly....but there's constantly someone on the Facebook JVC Owners home theater group, who can't help but to throw shade at the DCR lens! Saying it decreases "ansi contrast" by 50% and there's tons of barrel distortion, blah blah blah! Either I don't know WTF I'm looking for but I haven't seen any issues except amazing while watching my friends setup! Specs are a useful tool but don't tell the entire story! I wish people would think before they decide go throw shade and go outta there way to make people feel like they were stupid for getting a piece of kit!! Haters gonna hate!

@chuckolson5219

Жыл бұрын

i think the lack of true educational content about the nitty gritty of the what the lens is, and what it is actually doing in practice, is the issue. None of these dealers pumping out DCR videos are actually telling you what it is, and what it does, or even stating that it is a compression lens. That would be #1 on my list. Panamorph should be doing this and perhaps you won't see so much shade thrown its way

7:25 the vertical switch has cropped off about 1% on the top and that is unacceptable. the projector should have variable within tiny fractions not huge jumps where 1% or more is cropped off. That is correct 7:43 never look directly at the projector light. Brightness on screen only goes up so much % cos there is more light shining onto the screen surface but the light on projector is still the same only changes due to the switching and the less about of black bars area in the projector DLP or LCD or frigging 4-sharks with laser-beams. the aspect ratio for home theatres home cinemas is an international mess cos there has been no standard since it all started and hasn't even improved cos academy ratio movies should be nice square in middle of the screen and w/s a little fraction higher and lot wider and scope when shown should be the same height as w/s only it is a lot wider width and 70mm should be a lot more wider width than scope and a bit more higher in vertical so may as well have a 16:9 screen and make that scope a little less unless you all want play projectionist. Please been there and done it and certainly never care to ever do that again.

That was a jumbled mess of an explanation. I have a DCR lens and know how to use it and I still couldn’t follow what this guy was saying! 1) You adjust the pj to fill the width of the screen. 2) Use Anamorphic C on the JVC for 2.35-2.40 content. This mode stretches the image to fill the height of the projector panel, and the lens compresses it back down vertically to fit the screen using the full light output from the pj. 3) Use Anamorphic D for 16X9 content. The 16X9 image will fit the height of the screen but you’ll have black bars on the sides. You leave the lens in place at all times and toggle between these two modes. You don’t use any lens memories!

@petexian

Жыл бұрын

That’s what I do. I have a Panamorph and it’s stationary. I change aspect ratios on my JVC projector when I need to go from 16:9 to 2.35:1

The anamorphic lens discussion doesn't make sense. You're not "losing pixels" by having black bars at the top and bottom. When you zoom the 16:9 non-anamorphic lens to project the black bars above and below the 2.35:1 screen, you are getting a pixel accurate native resolution projection. Now, let's add an anamorphic lens to the equation. The projector has to digitally upscale the pixels to stretch the image/video vertically. The anamorphic lens then has to optically perform the exact opposite. You are not gaining pixels or resolution. Sure, you're gaining light output as you're using the entire height of the bulb output, but upscaling the image just to be squeezed back down adds an additional step that could degrade the quality. With an anamorphic lens, you're also adding glass or plastic for the light to pass through. Adding addition degradation of picture quality. And I haven't even started talking about barrel distortion. I would much rather make sure I have a projector with lens memory to optically zoom the 2.35 to project black bars above and below the screen for native resolution.

Big bang theory.. ew 😂

First

@sajihassan

3 жыл бұрын

👍