# Edge Blending: Cheaper by the dozen



## YONEXSP

How's this for an idea:


Why not post a wanted ad on http://www.rentacoder.com/ with the specifications for a PC Based Software Overlay & VMR Compatible Soft Edge blending solution.


They can even use http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/colour/edgeblend/ as a reference for the math and stuff.


If everyone chips in, we could easily raise enough for a few Indian coders to knock something up that just might do the job?


Thoughts anyone?


----------



## Saeid

Now that is a good idea, I am in.

Saeid


----------



## ecrabb

If all we had these days was DVD, then I'd be pretty excited about this. Unfortunately, without a way to pipe RGB or component through it (for HDDVD or OTA/sat), I'm just not that hot on the idea.


Now, if I could set up two cheap 8" projectors in an edge-blend setup, run a dedicated PC with dual-head video and some sort of high-res video input to scale into the edge-blended channels, I'd be all over it. Of course, then we wouldn't be talking cheap anymore.


SC


----------



## YONEXSP

Well, if you stick toOverlay for Rev 1.0 then any Software DVD PLayer would work. Including PDVD, WinDVD etc when they support HD DVD & BD. I know it's not VMR9, but it would be good enough for a heck of a lot of people, myself included.


If you use a DVB-S or DVD-T card, you wil still be able to use if for OTA & Satellite. With MyThetare software you can use the PDVD etc filters in overlay mode.


----------



## dokworm

I'd contribute.


----------



## YONEXSP

The trick is to write a Good Requirement Specification. Does anyone have access to Rational ReqPro or another good RS Management tool. We could start a collaborative RS. Even a good Spreadsheet to collect the RS's is a start.


----------



## Tim in Phoenix

You guys kill me.....


You will have spent, in time and effort, what our existing functioning DVX BlendZilla system costs, and your PC efforts will still give nothing.........


----------



## YONEXSP

Tim, why do you keep poo pooing our investigations? If the Blendzilla has nothing to worry about then it's kinda pointless to scoof at us. Most of us don't have $25k+ for your box so why don't you lets us be. If your right we are wasting our time, but it's our time to waste.


So far I've spent $0 so I have a longggg way to go before I reach your lofty costs.


----------



## YONEXSP

Pauls paper makes a great Requirement Specification to start with

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/colour/edgeblend/


----------



## MadMrH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tim* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You guys kill me.....
> 
> 
> You will have spent, in time and effort, what our existing functioning DVX BlendZilla system costs, and your PC efforts will still give nothing.........



Hey, Dont give Tim a hard time.............


I am one of very few people who actually HAS a blend rig up running and under test........


TIM is right! believe me, he is right!


AND even better still.........DONT waste your time on a blend solution, be happy with one PJ.


The actual time in setup of a blend - forget the hardware blender - is massive.


Tims system though the best so far still needs new tubes in one PJ, yet another additional cost.


You guys have NO IDEA the time needed to set up the PJ's


I found out the cyviz xpo2 is £9000.00 and does edgeblend , thats MORE than Blendzilla for LESS product. Trouble is these are ALL commercial units designed for massive display use and generate a revenue for the owners, for us there is no return for our money.


----------



## Prehjan

just a thought!


If we just waned to stick with SD material (which I am sure we're not!) there is a French guy that send me his .dll files to do just that with a couple pcs running dscaler...


Now maybe we can turn dscaler into am HD capable software, and by doing this then edge blending with just a couple of PCs and software may be possible!


I could try and ask him if such a thing is viable, basically to see if he can adopt his software to do this with just running dscaler and his plugins...(now i have no idea what is involved in such a "conversion"!!!)


I did try his dll files and set up two similar computers both running dscaler and the effort put into this yielded a decent picture with my 8" marquees as pjs...


I would think the best place to start would be with him...(He has already written the plugins and has experience in such a setup!)


PM me if interested and I will send you his email address so that you guys (we!) could talk to him direct about all this!


I agree with some of the other members:

--18 grand for a processor! Not to mention the cost of getting 2x9" displays is a lot of dough...(and no return on investment since we are using these setups for personal use!)


Just maybe we can convince him to try and write a more capable dscaler/plugins...


Martin


----------



## antorsae

Hi guys,


In my view the PC blending approach has the following pros/cons:


PROS

+ Cheaper than HW based solutions

+ More resolution options (e.g. 2350 x 1000 @ 75 Hz effective)

+ Orbiting to avoid burn-in (this is question mark if and only if Powerstrip works with dual heads, so take it with a grain of salt).


CONS

- High risk project. May not work at all. _This is the biggest con by far._

- Requires an engineering degree and lot's of time to get it right









- Only PC sources, even limited to a single player (MPC, VLC, etc.) and only compatible with certain hardware; this means no HD-DVD/Blu-Ray for the time being.


Having said that I experimented a bit with a pixel shader approach to the blending are. This is a piece of cake in terms of processing power, but it still needs quite some work to get it right. I am attaching some code that should be used in Media Player Classic.

Code:


Code:


sampler s0 : register(s0);
float4 p0 : register(c0);
float4 p1 : register(c1);

#define width (p0[0])
#define height (p0[1])
#define counter (p0[2])
#define clock (p0[3])
#define one_over_width (p1[0])
#define one_over_height (p1[1])
#define BZ 0.05
#define BZ2 BZ/2


#define PI acos(-1)

float4 main(float2 tex : TEXCOORD0) : COLOR
{
    float4 c0 = 0;
   
    if (tex.x


----------



## Mark_A_W

Powerstrip works with dual heads.


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Prehjan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> just a thought!
> 
> 
> If we just waned to stick with SD material (which I am sure we're not!) there is a French guy that send me his .dll files to do just that with a couple pcs running dscaler...
> 
> 
> Now maybe we can turn dscaler into am HD capable software, and by doing this then edge blending with just a couple of PCs and software may be possible!
> 
> 
> Just maybe we can convince him to try and write a more capable dscaler/plugins...
> 
> 
> Martin



Hi, it's me


turn DScaler into an HD capable software is no way (because HD capture card is very expensive & my DScaler edge blending is based on two PC ...)


So, if you want test (it's an alpha version) a VLC for windows with plug'in (named Panoramix)

download this distrib http://wwwsi.supelec.fr/cc/download/vlc-0.8.6-svn.zip .


VLC is SD, HD (mpeg2,4, divx ...) compliant, dvd player, stream feature & capture card compliant, see http://www.videolan.org 


My developpement is based on the wall plug-in with add of auto ratio detect and spawn into the wall (number of display is autodetect if you have dualhead cards ...) with overlapped and attenuated area.


For begining:

* Just set dual display (in windows) in extended mode with the same resolution.

* run VLC.EXE

* In preferences (menu Settings) -> "Interface" section -> "Main interfaces" -> "WxWidgets" sub-section uncheck "Embed video interface"

* In preferences (menu Settings), video sub-menu check "Fullscreen video output"

* In this video menu check "Panoramix" in Filters section

* In "Panoramix" section check "attenuation" & adjust the two sliders (to adjust the attenuation curve).

* Save Preferences

(* Check advanced options if you want more features ... but more complex.)

* Load a file or DVD.





If you have any comments, send me a mail at [email protected] 


Best regards


----------



## YONEXSP

I notice there is an option for OpenGL Video Output with a blending option, how does that work?


----------



## dokworm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tim* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You guys kill me.....
> 
> 
> You will have spent, in time and effort, what our existing functioning DVX BlendZilla system costs, and your PC efforts will still give nothing.........



So what, it is a hobby for us, and we get to learn all sorts of stuff along the way.

If we get it to work, then great, if not we have a lot of fun and learn heaps along the way.


It would take a lot of hobby experimentation to add up to 20 grand!


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dokworm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So what, it is a hobby for us, and we get to learn all sorts of stuff along the way.
> 
> If we get it to work, then great, if not we have a lot of fun and learn heaps along the way.
> 
> 
> It would take a lot of hobby experimentation to add up to 20 grand!




Here Here! I think the danger is we might suceed with a $1500 solution. Contraty to what has been said Paul Bourke proved it can be done with OpenGL on a PC already. His results looked pretty damn impressive to me.


----------



## dokworm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cocquebert* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi, it's me
> 
> 
> turn DScaler into an HD capable software is no way (because HD capture card is very expensive & my DScaler edge blending is based on two PC ...)
> 
> 
> So, if you want test (it's an alpha version) a VLC for windows with plug'in (named Panoramix)
> 
> download this distrib http://wwwsi.supelec.fr/cc/download/vlc-0.8.6-svn.zip .
> 
> 
> VLC is SD, HD (mpeg2,4, divx ...) compliant, dvd player, stream feature & capture card compliant, see http://www.videolan.org
> 
> 
> My developpement is based on the wall plug-in with add of auto ratio detect and spawn into the wall (number of display is autodetect if you have dualhead cards ...) with overlapped and attenuated area.
> 
> 
> For begining:
> 
> * Just set dual display (in windows) in extended mode with the same resolution.
> 
> * run VLC.EXE
> 
> * In preferences (menu Settings) -> "Interface" section -> "Main interfaces" -> "WxWidgets" sub-section uncheck "Embed video interface"
> 
> * In preferences (menu Settings), video sub-menu check "Fullscreen video output"
> 
> * In this video menu check "Panoramix" in Filters section
> 
> * In "Panoramix" section check "attenuation" & adjust the two sliders (to adjust the attenuation curve).
> 
> * Save Preferences
> 
> (* Check advanced options if you want more features ... but more complex.)
> 
> * Load a file or DVD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have any comments, send me a mail at [email protected]
> 
> 
> Best regards



Just tried this out, very very cool - (I love VLC it is the only thing that runs on my Windows, Mac and linux systems, even though this obviously only works on windows ATM)

I'm only running it on dual monitors at the moment, but when I get both my PGs back up I'll give it a proper shot.


----------



## Tim in Phoenix




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Tim, why do you keep poo pooing our investigations? If the Blendzilla has nothing to worry about then it's kinda pointless to scoof at us. Most of us don't have $25k+ for your box so why don't you lets us be. If your right we are wasting our time, but it's our time to waste.
> 
> 
> So far I've spent $0 so I have a longggg way to go before I reach your lofty costs.



Guys.....


I feel misunderstood here; if someone can concoct a PC hardware solution under $12K I would be excited, I am very skeptical that PCs can do this......standard DVDs maybe but everyone will want HiDef and that is a high bar to fly over, Good Luck to all trying.


----------



## dominical2

Tim for the most part we just cannot afford 16k for a blender ! So were forced to find another solution . You could sell a whole lot more BlendZillas at 3 to 5k so the market will decide the price . Give it a couple of years .......


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I notice there is an option for OpenGL Video Output with a blending option, how does that work?



Yes, I'm working about two OpenGL feature :


* geometry correction to project on a torus, cylinder or sphere screen (it's yet integrated in subversion of VLC)


* attenuation by OpenGL (with Panoramix parameters).:

pro :

- RGB attenuation vs YUV attenuation (in Panoramix plug-in)

- GPU compute vs CPU compute


cons:

main concept is based on a textured grid (flat, cylinder, torus ...) + set a

color (attenuation composante) of each node of the grid & OpenGL do a

Gouraud interpolation ... (in Panoramix plug-in luminance attenuation is

computed on each pixel)


To play with this option, just uncheck "attenuation" option in "Panoramix" filter and choose OpenGL in "Video Output modules" sub-menu (check "advanced options" to see this option) then choose one of "Blending method" in OpenGL section (adaptive methods are based on a gamma correction and the best is supposed to be "Adaptive-Color")



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dokworm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> (I love VLC it is the only thing that runs on my Windows, Mac and linux systems, even though this obviously only works on windows ATM)



I have compiled my plug-in (and OpenGL mod) for linux, it's running with some little bug (autodetect number of display, RGB32 RGB24 conversion ...)


----------



## YONEXSP

Cedric, how would you liek to make some Money? Do you think you would be able to code a wrapper piece of software to do the blending so that it would work with 3rd party Overlay DVD Players like PowerDVD, TT, etc?


It's only a 1st step, but I expect that eventually these commercial software players will support HD DVD, and that the issue of needing a HDMI Vidoe card will be taken care of by others.


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Cedric, how would you liek to make some Money? Do you think you would be able to code a wrapper piece of software to do the blending so that it would work with 3rd party Overlay DVD Players like PowerDVD, TT, etc?
> 
> 
> It's only a 1st step, but I expect that eventually these commercial software players will support HD DVD, and that the issue of needing a HDMI Vidoe card will be taken care of by others.



VLC (videolan) is an open source project and decode HD (mpeg2, H264, VC1 ...), but HD-DVD, Vista, HDCP and all content protections are not well-liked in this community ... (but with time ... DVD is readed by VLC)


The main problem to do a code with Overlay DVD Players is dual overlay ... (some dualhead cards can't do that)

VLC can create several video output windows (and deal with graphics card to have max overlay output, and have a fallback system). So I have just coded overlap & blend algorithm without any change in VLC output sub-system.


So, Pixel shader will be a good way to attenuate a part of image in Players like MPC (in VRM9), but I don't know split & overlap across an extended display ...


----------



## antorsae

One possible option which I have been briefly exploring (with little success) would be to use ATI's custom smart shaders. See this:

http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/atiss/index.php?p=4#comp 
http://www.driverheaven.net/smartshader/ 


But I have not been able to make pss to work under DirectX for the latest Catalyst releases. A third party application, ATITool exposes them to be used in OpenGL apps.


BR - Andres


----------



## dokworm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Cedric, how would you liek to make some Money? Do you think you would be able to code a wrapper piece of software to do the blending so that it would work with 3rd party Overlay DVD Players like PowerDVD, TT, etc?
> 
> 
> It's only a 1st step, but I expect that eventually these commercial software players will support HD DVD, and that the issue of needing a HDMI Vidoe card will be taken care of by others.



I'd be happy with VLC if it gets working completely, it will playback VOBs and .TS files etc, the only thing would be no live HDTV I guess.


Now if it would work with Zoomplayer I'd gladly have someone's babies...


----------



## Mark_A_W

Stop talking about the Overlay Ken - from my limited knowledge I suspect it would be much easier with VMR9. Plus VMR9 looks better (preserves video levels), and the Overlay will disappear soon.


Overlay is over.


----------



## YONEXSP

Fair dinkum, the path of least resistance is what we are after.


----------



## Mark_A_W

The problem with Overlay is there can be only one. You can't span video with the overlay.


----------



## GlenF

Overlay is old technology anyway, VMR9 would be the place to expend any effort.


----------



## YONEXSP

So, do we put this project onm rentacoder and see what the quotes back are? Then pass the hat? Otherwise as I posetd in http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...15#post7924315 the powers that be will kill all these initiatives in case they affect their $17k product.


----------



## none74

For what its worth, any software player you guys are talking about that can play MPEG2, pretty much all play HD MPEG2 .ts files which are(in many cases), very, very good looking files. HD playback is already done by every player mentioned, afaik, some do a better job than others, but they all have the capability, or am I missing something entirely ?

There are THOUSANDS of HD movies available via the .ts format....


----------



## YONEXSP

You are correct Paul, but it seems it's only valid to a few if it is able to manage HD DVD or BD Out put from standalone players. For me a PC based solution is just fine.


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> the powers that be will kill all these initiatives in case they affect their $17k product.



I resent that remark.. I say good luck with it. Not all us Blendzilla owners are haters.










Anyway, Just looking at Paul's work, did he manage to do it with just still pictures, or with live video, or it doesnt really matter?


----------



## YONEXSP

Just wondering why your personally resent that remark? I don't ever recall Pm'ing you, talking about you or referring to you in any post's I ever made? In fact I don;t think anyone ever directed any responses to you.. so what gives? Why are you all upset? Do you see yourself as a 'Power that be'?...


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Just wondering why your personally resent that remark? I don't ever recall Pm'ing you, talking about you or referring to you in any post's I ever made? In fact I don;t think anyone ever directed any responses to you.. so what gives? Why are you all upset? Do you see yourself as a 'Power that be'?...



ummmm.... see below from other thread



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> But then the threads get hijaked by the Blendzilla lovefeast Team, and poff, the momentum dies. So, I guess it will never happen as to many people get intimidated easily. Personally I don;t think the Blendzilla people should have a say in these threads. They have their $17k box, they should focus on selling it, instead of dumping on the rest of us.



I don't take it personally, and certainly not a 'power that be', but I am a friend of Tim... I just don't think you should say that those of us with the Blendzilla want you PC-based blenders to fail. As I said before... Good luck to you.










So don't misunderstand me, I am not upset at all. Notice the







after each of my posts. You seem to be the one getting upset.


----------



## GlenF

Might as well get a rentacoder quote.


I don't think anyone wants this to fail - a PC based solution would not be real competition for blendizilla type solutions anyway, some people want a standalone product and are willing to pay for it and the support etc. and some people will want a PC solution that they can tinker with and haven't got the cash for a standalone solution.

Two different markets really.


----------



## YONEXSP

Done, just finalizing the bid request with Rent-A-Coder


----------



## Tim in Phoenix

Guys!


I use an HTPC continuously as a source into BlendZilla and it throws a helluva picture for what I have invested, some of the best money I have ever spent on video stuff........


----------



## YONEXSP

With the announcment 2 days ago of WinDVD 8 and it's support for BD & Hd DVD it loosk like a PC Based solution is feasible for these formats. With a newer HDMI video card and the newere Software DVD players, perhaps it will meet some of the more simplere requirements.


----------



## dokworm

Well, I think you will need a new motherboard, and a new card etc. but still playback will come to PCs eventually.


----------



## YONEXSP

Well, project posted, just have to wait and see if anyone in India makes a bid for the work now.


----------



## YONEXSP

Ok,


I have received a quote to do the work. You can all look at the Job posting at

http://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder...questId=490795 


The quoted amount so far is $2750. Would anyone be interested in contributing $99 each for the development effort? We need 27 people and we break even. In talking tot he devloper (US Based), it will be possible later if required to have a DVI/RGB capture card in a PC so external playesr can use a PC as the Blending box. But that would be step 2.


Thx Ken./


----------



## dady24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ok,
> 
> 
> I have received a quote to do the work. You can all look at the Job posting at
> 
> http://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder...questId=490795
> 
> 
> The quoted amount so far is $2750. Would anyone be interested in contributing $99 each for the development effort? We need 27 people and we break even. In talking tot he devloper (US Based), it will be possible later if required to have a DVI/RGB capture card in a PC so external playesr can use a PC as the Blending box. But that would be step 2.
> 
> 
> Thx Ken./



sent you a pm Ken


Denver


----------



## Tim in Phoenix




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GlenF* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Might as well get a rentacoder quote.
> 
> 
> I don't think anyone wants this to fail - a PC based solution would not be real competition for blendizilla type solutions anyway, some people want a standalone product and are willing to pay for it and the support etc. and some people will want a PC solution that they can tinker with and haven't got the cash for a standalone solution.
> 
> Two different markets really.




I resemble that remark!


----------



## Saeid

Ken,

I am willing to conribute, will send a pm.

Saeid


----------



## YONEXSP

Hi all,


As a few have asked, here is the plan so far (nothing commited yet). The ultimate goal, would be to have a PC act as an external Blender etc.. I completely agree with those requirements. But a standalone box is going to be more complex & expensive right now as a Video Capture card is needed (SDI, Componet etc). But according the coder I have spoken with not really a problem beyond some extra cash. The plan is to do the core Blending & Overlap code to run as an intergrated version on a HTPC. Then move to step 2, which is to add a Capture card (SDI etc) and have the this feed into the original algorithm code.


It would be matter of taking the code he writes now (if the project is green lighted), and adding the capture code in front. So I thought this 2 step phased approach is probably better as it keeps the cost down to managable chunks.


What do you think?


Thx Ken./


----------



## YONEXSP

+ It gives those who use a HTPC a working version from the get go, and when HD DVD drives are generally available a way to use it for HD movies. Then the big boys with a little more padded wallets then me can get the standalone code for running on a dedicated PC with an SDI input card.


----------



## GlenF

I'd be willing to chip in - what sort of contract is this, are there penalties if the coder does not deliver, or is it pay on completion?


----------



## YONEXSP

If the coder does not deliver or delivers an unsatisfactory product, he does not get paid. Check out the way www.rentacoder.com works if you get the time. Very cool










So far I have 2 quotes, one from a coder in the USA, who according to his resume has done this type of software for defense contrators before in the past for Simulators etc. He quoted $2750.


The 2nd is a general Software development house in India quoting $2000. From the communication I have received so far the USA based coder is more experienced, and seems to be the real deal. My gut (and experience) tells me to go with the more expensive guy.


Having worked in software R&D for the past 12 years, he responds with all the right questions, and knows the issues before I even have to point them out. So far, even though it's $750 more, he is the #1 contendor right now.


So I'm looking for 27 guys to chip in. I will start a separate thread for the list, makes it easier to track.


Ken./


----------



## greg_mitch

do the people who chip in get free copies of thes software? Or is the software going to be free anyway?? What are the incentives to dontating besides helping us achieve a dream?? Why not wait back and just let you guys pay for it and download it next year when it is complete for free...or am I being too cynical?


----------



## YONEXSP

Good point. After the 1st 27, anyone else who wanted a copy would pay $299, and the money returned to the original investors until they get their money back. Then any subsequent money would be split evenly amonst them.


The 2nd phase, the 1st 27 would get a free copy, and evreyone else would pay a fee to purchase the 'Standalone' version. As the plan is to have the 2nd phase HD DVD------> Blender or HD DVD -------> scaler--------> blender so that anyone with any source can have a Blender to use.


I guess demorcracy does not work in this case. Put it another way, the 1st 27 to sign up get it for $99, the rest $299, assuming it is the dogs bollocks and works fantastic. Compared the the other solutions on the market it would be a bargain.


If think a simple web strore to buy the software, with an email notification to the 1st 27 when a sale has been made so they can keep track of their money would probably be OK.


I'm just trying to be as equitable as possible. Though I am grateful for any suggestions as to how to proceed.


----------



## dady24




----------



## YONEXSP

I have requested as part of the requiremts a Software licesne key mechnism. I know some smart alleck will probably crack it, but as it is a fairly niche product it would most likely have to be one of you. But I frequent the crakers request boards so , hey I might see it come in, and get it changed


----------



## dokworm

I can see phase1 working well, phase 2 I wouldn't count on as part of the protection mechanism of HD-DVD/BLURAY is to turn off the output if it detects a program running that messes with the display (i.e. to protect against framebuffer redirection to a file to capture the decoded picture etc.)


Still, $99 for phase1 with the prospect of perhaps getting your money back at some point seems a good deal.


----------



## YONEXSP

Dok, depends if you put a HDCP stripper in the loop perhaps... worth theorizing about perhaps.


----------



## MTyson

I'm thinking of contributing, but about how long would this take after paying to be done?


Also, how complicated will this be to use and will I still be able to use with FFDShow processing (which I use with Zoom Player Pro)?


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm thinking of contributing, but about how long would this take after paying to be done?
> 
> 
> Also, how complicated will this be to use and will I still be able to use with FFDShow processing (which I use with Zoom Player Pro)?



I have asked for a timeplan from the developer, so I will get back to you on that. I will check if FFDShow is compatible. I am not to sure what layer that is implemented in. It should be OK if the overlap & Blending is done at the final VMR9 layer, as I believe that is past the postprocessing layer that FFDshow occurs in.


----------



## WheatKing

This works great.. thanks!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cocquebert* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi, it's me
> 
> 
> turn DScaler into an HD capable software is no way (because HD capture card is very expensive & my DScaler edge blending is based on two PC ...)
> 
> 
> So, if you want test (it's an alpha version) a VLC for windows with plug'in (named Panoramix)
> 
> download this distrib http://wwwsi.supelec.fr/cc/download/vlc-0.8.6-svn.zip .
> 
> 
> VLC is SD, HD (mpeg2,4, divx ...) compliant, dvd player, stream feature & capture card compliant, see http://www.videolan.org
> 
> 
> My developpement is based on the wall plug-in with add of auto ratio detect and spawn into the wall (number of display is autodetect if you have dualhead cards ...) with overlapped and attenuated area.
> 
> 
> For begining:
> 
> * Just set dual display (in windows) in extended mode with the same resolution.
> 
> * run VLC.EXE
> 
> * In preferences (menu Settings) -> "Interface" section -> "Main interfaces" -> "WxWidgets" sub-section uncheck "Embed video interface"
> 
> * In preferences (menu Settings), video sub-menu check "Fullscreen video output"
> 
> * In this video menu check "Panoramix" in Filters section
> 
> * In "Panoramix" section check "attenuation" & adjust the two sliders (to adjust the attenuation curve).
> 
> * Save Preferences
> 
> (* Check advanced options if you want more features ... but more complex.)
> 
> * Load a file or DVD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have any comments, send me a mail at [email protected]
> 
> 
> Best regards


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WheatKing* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> This works great.. thanks!



Wheatking can you post some screen shots?


----------



## dady24

We want







pics.......Please










Denver


----------



## WheatKing

i've just been using it on my PC.. i don't have 2 projectors.. yet.. LOL


but a 1x2 appears to blend properly.. a 3x3 has all the blending in all the right places.. it's REALLY cool..


just for kicks i tried a 4x4.. cpu took a big hit.. but all the edges appear to blend properly, and all the windows have the blending in all the right spots.. and the timing seems to be spot on.. meaning one window doesn't lag behind another and audio stays in sync.


maybe someone who has you know.. like 4 projectors in the garage collecting dust can brush a few off and give it a shot and get us some pics..


The software does appear to work as described.


----------



## God_TM

Why not sourceforge this project rather than 'renting a coder'?


----------



## dady24

explain please


----------



## God_TM

i.e.: Keep the software part of it open source.


I'm sure there are plenty of home theater enthousiast programmers out there...


----------



## WheatKing

screen caps.. 2x2 image.. the one on the top left is a hardware overlay, so i can't capture it.. the rest are software.











3 by 3.. again.. pic on top left is a hardware overlay..


----------



## dady24




----------



## WheatKing

so.... who wants to loan me.. say.. 6 g90's











LOL


----------



## dady24

6.... Lets go all out with 9 of em


----------



## YONEXSP

Mighty Cool! As soon as I get settle in next week I am gonna give this a whirl on my 2 XG's


----------



## YONEXSP

Update from rentacoder. Commenst welcome


Dear yonexsp,


A new comment was posted in response to your bid request on 7/12/2006 6:39:15 PM on http://www.RentACoder.com .



Comment Date:7/12/2006 6:39:15 PM

Comment:Hi Ken,


Spent a few hours on this today. Sorry I did not get this to you by midday as promised.


Assumptions:

1) That the projects are calibrated and color-corrected.

2) You want this to work with any 3rd-party player software that uses DirectX.

3) This is all done on a single machine. It is recommended to use a dual-core machine.

4) SLI graphics are used where you have one card for every projector output. This will just make things easier - although more expensive.

5) Using Nvidia cards. This is implied by #4 above.


Note: It would be easier if assumption #2 was eliminated and you standardized on one player - e.g., Windows Media Player - and extended it with the functionality you need. This is because the most difficult aspect of this is how to capture the frames from the player software in a generic fashion.


Schedule & Estimates (in hours):

1) Instrument DirectX - i.e., use a DirectX proxy - to be able to capture frames from the player. (40 hours)

2) Make the frame available to the D3D rendering context. (24 hours)

3) Turn each captured frame into a 1920x1080 texture. (4 hours)

4) Create blend mask textures for 2 and 3 projector configurations. (4 hours)

5) Render a quad properly parameterized into the frame texture and associated with the right blend texture. (8 hours)

6) Debug - esp. make sure that SLI graphics are working correctly. (40 hours)


Total estimate: 120 hours


Tim


----------



## Mark_A_W

Ok Ken, so it's a plugin for a media player. It will not work for the desktop, or for Games.


Don't pic Media Player - it sucks. Zoom Player would be my choice if I was you- HT friendly and configurable.


----------



## Brian Hampton

Quote - "AND even better still.........DONT waste your time on a blend solution, be happy with one PJ."


Works for me.


----------



## PGPFan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Comment Date:7/12/2006 6:39:15 PM
> 
> Comment:Hi Ken,
> 
> 
> Spent a few hours on this today. Sorry I did not get this to you by midday as promised.
> 
> 
> Assumptions:
> 
> 1) That the projects are calibrated and color-corrected.
> 
> 2) You want this to work with any 3rd-party player software that uses DirectX.
> 
> 3) This is all done on a single machine. It is recommended to use a dual-core machine.
> 
> 4) SLI graphics are used where you have one card for every projector output. This will just make things easier - although more expensive.
> 
> 5) Using Nvidia cards. This is implied by #4 above.
> 
> 
> Note: It would be easier if assumption #2 was eliminated and you standardized on one player - e.g., Windows Media Player - and extended it with the functionality you need. This is because the most difficult aspect of this is how to capture the frames from the player software in a generic fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tim



I'm considering chipping in on this as well. However, I don't necessarily agree with his reply concerning #2. I understand that it would be 'easier', but it certainly isn't in our best interest to limit ourselves like that considering that (hopefully) the original investers would get a return on their investment.


I believe that at a 'minimum' we should require the 2 market leaders in our niche (TheaterTek and Zoomplayer) be supported. If we don't have wide support, we won't have wide demand for this piece of software.


What about SageTV? or MCE? or BTV? or .........?


-PGPfan


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian Hampton* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Quote - "AND even better still.........DONT waste your time on a blend solution, be happy with one PJ."
> 
> 
> Works for me.



Does that also work if you want a 16' wide 1920x1080p image?


----------



## YONEXSP

I also don;t agree with #2, so that is not an option for me either. Though if you read it, it is only a suggestion from the developer not a requirement.


----------



## JBJR

I would chip in on this only if I could be assured that TheaterTek would work with it, since that is what I use.


John


----------



## Graham Johnson

You guys realise that the VLC player blending works great dont you?


In fact, I have used the VLC player for quite a while and the pic quality is very very good better in fact than Theatre tech.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You guys realise that the VLC player blending works great dont you?
> 
> 
> In fact, I have used the VLC player for quite a while and the pic quality is very very good better in fact than Theatre tech.



I require Zoom Player pro. I use FFDShow for degraining and to sharpen up DVDs. For me, it has to work with Zoom Player Pro and FFDShow (which works with Zoom Player Pro). I tried TheaterTek and did not like it.


BTW, the blending doens't seem to work on my VLC player. Infact, hardly any of the extra options do. Not sure why. I've never been able to get VLC to work quite right for rme.


----------



## Briands

I agree that these limitations are unacceptable. The target is for the display to be displayed on the blended projectors so that ANY output can be blended (application independant). Anything less is not really acceptable.


----------



## dokworm

Yeah that limitation doesn't get you anything that isn't currently in the VLC player.

The VLC thing works bloody well, I'm only messing with a pair of low end LCDs at the moment til I get my two PGs back up and running, but it looks the business.


It might just be easier to get some of the Zoomplayer FFDSHOW plugins re-written to work with VLC for the meantime?


If I had to pick a single player it would be Zoomplayer though.


----------



## Graham Johnson

The VLC player will play WMVHD disks as well you realise!!


I have used VLC for these for quite a while. You need to use the WMV10 plug ins but it works.


I have had a play with FFdshow and while I dont have the experience of using multiple plug ins like the FFdshow people like Dok And Mark use. So I just continued with VLC.


Out of the box the VLC player provides a better picture than any other software player I have seen. It can however be a little flakey at times.


----------



## MTyson

YONEXSP, will this software allow you to adjust the picture outside of the blend zone (especially black level)? I ask this because there is a system that does and it allows digitals to also be used for blending. That would be a really nice feature to have. I'm sure some of the digitals guys would appreciate it as well.










I personally have a use for this, because I would like to also blend two digitals and make a huge rear projection set for gaming and other ambient light viewing on a dark grey rear screen. Also, it would reduce the depth by having two projectors. If that's not too much to ask could you see if this feature could be added?


----------



## WheatKing




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> YONEXSP, will this software allow you to adjust the picture outside of the blend zone (especially black level)? I ask this because there is a system that does and it allows digitals to also be used for blending. That would be a really nice feature to have. I'm sure some of the digitals guys would appreciate it as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I personally have a use for this, because I would like to also blend two digitals and make a huge rear projection set for gaming and other ambient light viewing on a dark grey rear screen. Also, it would reduce the depth by having two projectors. If that's not too much to ask could you see if this feature could be added?



This is usually handled by the video cards advanced properties in the driver.. and not in the player itself. Use your video card drivers to get the colour balanced between the projectors, and get your greyscale set equally, and then use VLC to adjust the blend overlap etc..


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WheatKing* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> This is usually handled by the video cards advanced properties in the driver.. and not in the player itself. Use your video card drivers to get the colour balanced between the projectors, and get your greyscale set equally, and then use VLC to adjust the blend overlap etc..




VLC doesn't work for me. None of the picture opitons seem to work at all for me. Blending, Brightness, contrast or any of the other options in the setup menu. Nothing. So, right now I'm not a fan. I've never installed VLC and had the setup menu options work for me. I have no clue why. I coudln't install their newest version without having to click ignore a thousand times while windows popped up during the installation saying it could install a certain file. Of course it didn't work right afterwards. The older version installs fine, but none of its picture options work and I do click "save" and then ok.


Also, I'm hoping to be able to use Zoom Player pro, because I cannot stand not being able to use FFDShow. However, I wouldn't mind being able to test with VLC IF I could make it work for once, but it just doesn't seem like that's going to happen unless someone can explain how to make it work.


----------



## WheatKing

i'm no VLC expert.. just started using it a few days ago, BUT.. filters don't do anything unless you check them under the filter dialog.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WheatKing* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> i'm no VLC expert.. just started using it a few days ago, BUT.. filters don't do anything unless you check them under the filter dialog.




Wow thanks, I had no idea that you had to check those tiny white squares. I thought they were there for looks.







Seriously, I have checked options before and tried to make things work.


Here's a quick update though as I am writing this post. I had version 8.2 (I think) and the options never worked for me for some reason. I tried installing the newest version last night, but got "cannot install file _____" errors over and over and over that I had to ignore. Needless to say the software didn't work well afterwards. I just tried installing the software again and now it installed fine (I guess my PC just needed a restart). So, hopefully this new version will actually work.


If this software can do everything that is claimed I should be able to get a seamless blend using two digital projectors (or CRTs), correct?


BTW, my new version doesn't seem to have the "Panoramix" option to select. Is there a plugin I need to download? If so, where? I've looked, but can't locate it and I've tried updating the software.


Thanks


----------



## Graham Johnson

download it from the link in the thread.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> download it from the link in the thread.



Thanks.


----------



## dokworm

VLC also plays .ts files recorded from HDTV broadcasts, but you will need to join them to a single .ts file if you want seamless playback.


----------



## n733

First thing first hi to all ...im a nwbie to crt world bearly got my barco graphics 800 a couple of months ago.Anyways i was wondering around in the forum in the wee hours of the night and found this just thougt it might be revelant to this disscusion matrox website has a card for this coming out. I dont have enuff post count to put a link but here the title in the page Matrox Graphics announces the new PJ-4OLP display controller for ultra-wide screen projection


----------



## Gino AUS

Here is the link:

Matrox Graphics announces the new PJ-4OLP display controller for ultra-wide screen projection 


And some specs on the card:


Delivering the industry's highest quality digital and analog output, along with key features such as edge-overlapping, the Matrox PJ-4OLP can be combined with edge-blending technologies for the seamless delivery of digital content across two, three or four projectors. The Matrox PJ-4OLP helps you get your message across in any mid- to large-sized presentation, project or screening environment.


Key features

Support for up to 4 digital or analog projectors at a time

Edge-overlap support across 2, 3 or 4 projectors

Flexible support for 2 x 1, 3 x 1, 4 x 1 and 2 x 2 configurations


66 MHz PCI interface (compatible with all PCI and PCI-X slots) for PJ-4OLP display controller

256 MB graphics memory

Dual 400 MHz 10-bit RAMDACs

Matrox UltraSharp Display Output Technology

Industry leading MTBF and robust driver support

OpenGL® and Microsoft® DirectX

Three-year parts and labor warranty


Hardware included

Matrox display controller

Necessary cables and connectors


Software included

Matrox display driver for Microsoft® Windows® XP x64, Windows® XP and Windows® 2000

Matrox PowerDesk (driver interface and utilities)


Maximum resolutions*

Single output (Analog/Digital):

SVGA: 800 x 600

XGA: 1024 x 768

SXGA: 1280 x 1024

SXGA+: 1400 x 1050

WXGA: 1366 x 768

WSXGA+: 1680 x 1050

UXGA: 1600 x 1200


Max Dual, Triple and Quad output resolutions:

3200 x 1200 (2 x 1) dual analog/digital

4800 x 1200 (3 x 1) triple analog/digital

6400 x 1200 (4 x 1) quad analog/digital

* Custom resolutions also supported. Contact Matrox for more information.


Minimum system requirements

System: PCI

256 MB RAM

600 MHz CPU

Microsoft® Windows® XP x64 (64-bit), Windows® XP, or Windows® 2000 operating system

300W system power supply

CD-ROM


----------



## Chris Bigos

Mmm - the Matrox blurb carefully avoids saying it will do the blending, just that it will overlap. I can't see what use that is though....


----------



## ecrabb

I don't think a lot of cards and drivers will do overlap, will they? Isn't that the point of the Matrox solution? I got right away from the first paragraph that the Matrox isn't the whole solution:



> Quote:
> ...the Matrox PJ-4OLP can be combined with edge-blending technologies...



SC


----------



## Chris Bigos

OK - guess I'm too dumb at this










I thought the Quadro cards did overlap and blend (imperfectly) so wondered what the big deal was with this new Matrox that only did overlap.


So you would use the Matrox for the overlap, plus some clever s/w for the blend - like the VLC s/w mentioned above? With those two combined you would be able to do a nice 2x2? I happen to have four nice PGs (but unfortunately no room....)


----------



## gigemgal03

Will any graphics cards or solutions out there generate overlapped DVI output for three monitors? Seems to be lots of options for dual-monitors, but haven't found a solution for three yet.


I don't need any special edge blending, that's taken care of with another system. I just need to generate output that overlaps as follows:


Result is an effective output of 3200x1024:

dvi_out1: 1280x1024

dvi_out2: 1280x1024 @960x0

dvi_out3: 1280x1024 @1920x0


Thanks!


----------



## dokworm

It looks like the Matrox will.


----------



## gigemgal03

oops, I left off a requirement: We also have to support stereo rendering... I don't see that the Matrox supports stereo.


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I require Zoom Player pro. I use FFDShow for degraining and to sharpen up DVDs. For me, it has to work with Zoom Player Pro and FFDShow (which works with Zoom Player Pro). I tried TheaterTek and did not like it.
> 
> 
> BTW, the blending doens't seem to work on my VLC player. Infact, hardly any of the extra options do. Not sure why. I've never been able to get VLC to work quite right for rme.




Back from Moving city, I'll update everyone this week on the blending effort. Sorry for the absence but moving house is a pain in the butt.


I can't get the VLC player to work







It keeps crashing


----------



## GlenF

Anything will suport stereo rendering, it is just a matter of being able to get a sync pulse to the glasses controller.


----------



## MadMrH

The Quadro cards are dual output BUT there is a QUAD output card NOW available,


ALSO linking of 2 cards is possible.


I have NOT tried that!


But have tried just above everything else with them.......


Andy.


----------



## YONEXSP

Ok,


I will have an update later today/tommorow from Rent-a-Coder. I'll post it here when received.


br ken./


----------



## dokworm

To anyone thinking of doing this, put in the legwork and get VLC going (I can't make it crash, but if you have installed codec packs it could be a problem).

Once you get VLC going then you have a solution (the blend is *working* now!) and you can start playing with a blended setup.

Actually using a blended setup will give you all a better idea of what you would really really want in custom blending software. i.e. by physically playing with it you get a much better understanding of what you would really like it to be able to do, and traps to look out for etc.


----------



## benwillcox

Hi dokworm,


Can you tell us more about your testing with VLC? I've tried it with 1 PJ and 1 monitor so far and looks like it works, but I don't have 2 pjs at the moment to see how well the blend actually works in practice.

Got any info/tips/pointers etc on what you've achieved with it so far?


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## dokworm

I've just had it running while my two projectors were on the ground, and can confirm it works with no 'bright line' or other 'bad blend' issues.

Other than that not much, I only played with it for about 30 minutes but it worked pretty effortlessly. To do a blend for me means fabricating new mount points in my shed, so I haven't made my mind up yet.


My point was the VLC solution gives a serviceable blend *today* with zero investment. Anyone with 2 PJs that is even vaguely considering a blend should start using it now and get some experience with blending, it would be invaluable for speccing out any future system.


I'm just surprised that noone on the 'willing to pay for a blend' list are really trying out the free solution in any serious way.


As for tips etc.


1) If it crashes for you, then get troubleshooting! Anything learned will help with a future product.

2) You need a good graphics card to handle the playback at the really high rez required.

3) If you have installed 'codec packs' then wipe your machine and start again, just install the codecs you need. Nothing will crash your machine faster than a big fat codec pack.

4) Install the coreavc codec with Haali splitter for good HD playback of WMV etc. files.

Thats about it, it was just a quick play.


----------



## YONEXSP

Dok, how many columns & rows do you havew configured?


----------



## YONEXSP

I can't get a satisfactory result from this software, very unintuitive


----------



## YONEXSP

I take it back, got it working with my 2 NEC XG's







Very Impressive.


----------



## YONEXSP

I will post some pic's later today.


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I will post some pic's later today.



Cool. I am waiting











I know it's early stages (well it is for me) but something I've been thinking about, which is a disadvantage of using the player to do the blend, is that any frontend software (I use Meedio at the moment) won't work as it won't be blended.

So it would need some alternative method of selecting media files to play. I was thinking maybe a third VGA output with a monitor with the user interface on it or something like that. I think I'd actually prefer to have all the movie selection stuff not appear on the main PJ screen anyway. Or possibly a web interface on a tablet PC or similar to control the HTPC running VLC thats got the blend setup.

Any thoughts?


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hello all,


Yonexp, do try two colums and one row, if you are using two projectors in a side-by-side blend. I just left the settings at their defaults, which picked up my configuration automatically.


Dokworm, I share your surprise regarding the lack of experimentation with this software. That said, it does take some effort to put together a blended pair of projectors, and until you have a set of criteria to limit the glut of possibilities for set-up configurations it's hard to see where to jump in. In my case the set-up was made easier by virtue of the fact that I already had my projectors calibrated to a grid, from my nVidia attempts. With that baseline, setting up the Panoramix filter was trivial; the software was already or auto-configured itself such that I only had to change two parameters to get a blended image. The first is some sort of horizontal/width modulation that stretched the image between the software parameters 0-2500. The other was the brightness of the blend-zone. I didn't jump into any more of the advanced option because the filter simply works. If anyone is interested, I can write up a quick guide for setting up two projectors for an effective 1920x1080 blend. It's not that difficult, but I may be able to save someone some time in experimentation.


To M. Cocquebert: Thank you much for releasing this software. It is a pleasure to use. Your skill as a software engineer shines in the elegance of this solution; while I have no idea how this software works it simply does. Do you do any work in DirectShow?


In my mind, the question of competent blending using PCs is settled. The image produced by the Panoramix filter is transparent with regard to the blend. I've spent more time than I cared to have trying to modulate and compensate for the blend-zone irregularities in the nVidia implementation and while I learned quite a bit in struggling with it, using the Panoramix was like a breath of fresh air in that the filter just works. That makes it sound simple, right? Not really...


While the M. Cocquebert's blend works flawlessly, the VLC software itself presents some benefits and challenges to those who actually watch movies, as opposed to someone holed up and hell bent on arriving at a transparent blend solution. One of the major benefits of VLC as I see it the software's ability to work with DirectShow capture filters. Blackmagic Designs makes an HD-SDI I/O board called the "Decklink HD Extreme" that ships with a DirectShow filter. Theoretically, then, it would be possible to capture an HD-SDI stream with the Decklink and port it through DirectShow into VLC, which would split and blend the image via the Panoramix filter. Testing this is next on my list, and VLC is only software that I know of that can do this.


The problem, given my incomplete understanding of the situation, with VLC is that its internal deinterlacing capabilities are a generation (at least) behind what the HTPC and outboard scaler sets are used to, at least for film deinterlacing. Basically, I'm seeing deinterlacing artefacts on my nVidia 5700LE in the VLC image. Curiously enough, I didn't see as many artefacts when I ran the software on a MacBook Pro, using an ATI x1600 video card. In both instances I had the VLC software deinterlacing set to "none." My uneducated guess is that when the deinterlacing in VLC is set to off, the video renderer (or renderers, in this case) passes the interlaced image segments to the video card which then deinterlaces the video in hardware. If this is the case, then the deinterlacing in the VLC/Panoramix approach will be exactly as good as the hardware deinterlacing in the video card used. Since this software works with any video card, I would hope that this would yield some good options. If this is not the case, I'm stumped as to how to implement an IVTC algorithm comparable in function to the current generation of outboard scalers/HTPCs in software/video-card hardware in the VLC program.


The other drawback that I see in the VLC approach has to do with the software decompression of MPEG-2 sources. While this isn't an issue with an HD-SDI source, everything else that I would want to display is MPEG-2. It may be a placebo, but I far prefer the image resulting from DScaler 5.008 with IVTC over nVidia's Purevideo or any number of other decoders I have tried. I think that there is a visible difference in software decoders, but I'll leave that up for debate. I subjectively prefer the image from the DScaler decoders over the VLC internal decoders, which is a sticking point if a "reference" display is the goal.


This is, however, picking nits as it relates to the blend. The bottom line is that the Panoramix plugin works, and works well. Before I bore anyone any more with all of this I'll just mention that I've cooked up a graph in Graphedit that takes a video feed from DScaler 5, splits the image into two overlapping 1280x1080 segments and presents it to two VMR9 renderers. I've tried all sorts of things to achieve a luma roll-off, including inverted bitmap overlays etc. but I can't get ffdshow to read the alpha values of a 24-bit .png image. So right now, this system would work as a front end for the Cyviz blenders, but I think the whole blending apparatus can be achieved in DirectShow. If anyone is interested in details or can help, please do drop me a line.


Have a good one everybody,

Slarti


----------



## YONEXSP

OK, Before we start:


1) My 2 XG's are not calibrated (colour)

2) They are only on the floor right now as I just moved into a new home

3) The screen is 2.35:1 aspect ratio & is 2 pieces of old BO cloth taped together with Drywall tape, and taped to the uneven wall

4) I have only done a very rough alignment & converge (It's actually horrendous) Wavy material is not the best to try and align to with all the creases.


SO Be Aware of these caveats 1st


So with that siad here are the pictures


----------



## YONEXSP

last two


----------



## YONEXSP

I also have not played with the image settings in the panamarix filter. But it looks like if you use 2 xact PJ's you can get a seemless blend. With just 1 quick tweak It was pretty damned good to my eyes


----------



## YONEXSP

Anyone know how to get a DVD working with this software?


----------



## YONEXSP

Damn, if this plugin worked with TT2.2 I'd be done


----------



## YONEXSP

Have the problems with the image is the dirty wobbly screen (see attached)


----------



## slartibartfasst

Has anyone seen my jaw? I think I lost it when it hit the floor... I didn't know that the filter would work on a 2.35 screen. How wide is that image, Yonexp?


----------



## YONEXSP

54x127 roughly


----------



## YONEXSP

I was playing the 720p WMVHD Version of 5th Element


----------



## YONEXSP

This filter is awesome! It works great!


----------



## MadMrH

Im just waiting for my TWO BArco 1209s units I bought last week to arrive, then I intend to get back to blending and it looks like I will give the VLC software a go...............


I like many others have spent WAY too long trying the nvidia system which could work but only if they update the drivers which they just dont seem to want to do.......


----------



## YONEXSP

It works alright, but I'd much prefer a Blending solution I could use with any application. Also, I will try a stack tonight as well. From what I saw, I think Art has it right. a 1920x1080 stack is the way to go. A blend is Good, but you don;t need the extra resolution as much as the extra light output. BUT the blend is cool coz I can do a proper 2.35:1 aspect ratio screen (constant Height)


----------



## Briands

Yonexsp, I assume that the first picture if of the windows desktop with an application window in the left half and that there is no blend, but the overlap is functional.


So can we list the shortcomings of this approach?


Obviously it only works for media files (though it will work with DVDs as well)


Is it VRM w/ FSE?


I noticed the Deinterlacing options listed in the default install of VLC do no seem to jive with those of Purevideo. Am I missing something? I also don't see weave as an option.

The first will impact the appearance of the front end that you may opt to use. Maybe you could skin XLobby into two halves with a preblended graphic in the blend zone. Put controls on one side and content on the other.


Lastly, any idea of the hardware requirements to do this with HD content?


----------



## YONEXSP

Brian, no overlap, the VLC plugin takes care of that, so no overlap in Windows, one of the major short commings. VRM/FSE? don;t know those terms. It is VMR not overlay if that is what you mean.


I am using the Nvidia PureVideo decoder so I expect it is taking care of the deinterlacing etc..


Ken./


----------



## YONEXSP

Few more pic's before I turn this into a stack attempt, unless someone in the Toronto area wants to take a look before.


----------



## Gino AUS

Yonexsp, can I ask why you think the stack would be better over the blend?


----------



## Mark_A_W

In my experience a stack cannot be as sharp as a single projector.


I hear Art's is smicko, so my hat's off to Ken W.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It works alright, but I'd much prefer a Blending solution I could use with any application. Also, I will try a stack tonight as well. From what I saw, I think Art has it right. a 1920x1080 stack is the way to go. A blend is Good, but you don;t need the extra resolution as much as the extra light output. BUT the blend is cool coz I can do a proper 2.35:1 aspect ratio screen (constant Height)



But using the same projectors you should get more extra light using a blend than a stack. With 2.35:1 images at the same size a blend is potentially upto or past 1.5x brighter than a stack doing 2.35:1. A stack does simplify things a bit (though it has it's share of complications as well), but blending has its share of benefits if done right:


Pros:


1: Capable of a larger image. As big as 20' wide, especially with a super large Torus.

2: Capable of the highly sought after 1080p at the lowest cost possible.

3: Shorter throw for a larger image.

4: Short throw (without the negative effects of single pj short throw) would allow for a rear projection setup that should work well in some ambient light using a dark grey rear screen.


Cons:


1: Can't use any application unless you havea custom specially designed screen to take care of the blend zone (not sure if that's possible, but I plan to test it).

2: Uneven wear at the blend zone.

3: You'll be pretty much screwed out of viewing HD-DVD for awhile.


Stack Pros:


1: Double the brightness.

2: Can be used with any application where the signal can be split into two.

3: Capable of a larger image than a single CRT.


Stack Cons:


1: Not easy to setup.

2: Slightly softer picture than with a single CRT or blended setup.


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gino AUS* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yonexsp, can I ask why you think the stack would be better over the blend?



Mostly because of the uneven wear issue. A lot of movies are 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 so I'd be worried about the wear from them. Though having a 2.35:1 screen is very cool







From the simple blend I had running today it is very impressive to have 10.5ft wide screen


----------



## Gino AUS

wouldnt a stack give you uneven wear of the tubes also? more of a rhomboid shape rather than square/rectangle?


----------



## Sinobi




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mostly because of the uneven wear issue. A lot of movies are 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 so I'd be worried about the wear from them.



....And you don't get uneven wear running 2.35/1.85/1.78:1 on a stack?

The wear will be worse on a stack, allthough in the top and buttom.

For a given FL you'll get less wear on a blend because of more inch of phosphor than in a stack.


BTW. very impressive pic's !!!

Can't wait to try it out myself.

Just have to:

Make a 2.35:1 screen

Finish my new HTPC

Mount and setup my 2 1271

Leave for 3 weeks to get a truck licence (work, NOT hobby related)

I'll post pics aswell....in a month....(sigh...)


Henrik


----------



## TheRedknight

Those pics look amazing YONEXSP


----------



## MTyson

You're gonna get uneven wear no matter what unless you rarely use anything but one specific aspect ratio. A blend setup will cause much worse uneven wear than stacking. With stacking your just overlaying one image onto the other. With a blended setup you are lowering the output of the blendzone to make it blend in with the rest of the image. This means that in time the proejctors will be virtually unusable by themselves in a non blended set up.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Ken,


kudos to you, I did only saw a few moments ago that you did a blend before the stack.


Too bad we can't blend all sources we want to play yet, but seeing it working for next to no money at all is very very cool !


Don't kid yourself when it comes to resolution - all CRT's will look much better resolution-wise in a proper blend.


And just to think about the much lower requirements for bandwidth - fantastic.


Oliver


----------



## antorsae

Ken - Great pics!


Looks like the VLC plugin is the way to go! I wish I had my basement ready to start doing tests with my two 9500s!!!


BTW, although feasible for HD-DVD and other HD sources the DirectShow capture approach would introduce too much delay for gaming, so unless a native (i.e. driver-level) PC approach is devised, gaming is not still possible.


With regards to the wear, I suggest trying Powerstrip's built-in orbiting functionality. I have not tried it, but if it works in the two monitors it would reduce chances of burn-in.


BR - Andres


----------



## dokworm

But a stack would wear faster than a blend.

A stack still throws away nearly half the phosphor, so in theory would be a lot dimmer than a blend solution where you use a larger part of each phosphor - so I think wear would be a bigger issue with a stack than a blend, you would have to run a stack much harder to get the same brightness.I think getting a decent blend lineup is easier than a stack, you only have to get the overlap part nailed down, where with a stack you have to get it all identical - hard work.


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You're gonna get uneven wear no matter what unless you rarely use anything but one specific aspect ratio. A blend setup will cause much worse uneven wear than stacking. With stacking your just overlaying one image onto the other. With a blended setup you are lowering the output of the blendzone to make it blend in with the rest of the image. This means that in time the proejctors will be virtually unusable by themselves in a non blended set up.



I could be wrong here, but with a blend, you are getting uneven wear on just the left or right side of the raster


But, with a stack, as the projectors are side by side, the geometry of each projector is asymmetrical, something like the right side is taller than the left side and vice versa for the other projector. This means that when trying to use it in a single projector setup, there is 'diagonal' wear on the tubes. With the blended tubes, you just need to keep the image in the non blended part of the tube, slightly to the left/right


In any case, I still see a blended setup as being easier to converge as you are only worrying about the blend zone, it's more forgiving... so easier to get a sharper image. There is a shorter throw, so you dont need to drive the tubes hard, and there is plenty of brightness. You use most of the phosphor, and finally you basically split the bandwidth between projectors.


----------



## antorsae

Yes. I agree. Let me throw in some number I crunched regarding *effective* phosphor usage:


A) Blending for 2.35 AR results in 88% raster usage.

B) Blending for 16:9 AR results in raster 66% usage.

C) Stacking 2.35 AR results in 57% raster usage.

D) Stacking 16:9 AR results in 75% raster usage.


With 2.35AR blending is the clear winner. In addition, you can do crazy resolutions like >1000 lines horizontal and 72 Hz and still be within the limits of the PJ specs (in the case of a 9500 Ultra machine). Why do I think 72Hz is important? Less rainbow effect (due to uneven phosphor decay rates) and ability to use WinDVD Trimension plugin to do temporal frame interpolation (movies look like video, I love it!).


BR - Andres


----------



## Mark_A_W

You don't really need Windvd Trimension at 72hz. You can get a nice 3:3 cadence at 72hz - it's still 24fps, but perfectly smooth.


If you are going to interpolate, you may as well pick 60hz...or 66hz..or 57hz - it doesn't matter.


----------



## YONEXSP

So, what you saying is, that if I watch mostly 2.35:1 AR i should Blend. But if I do mostly 1.78:1 then I should stack...


Hummm, wish I knew what the mostly like AR will be for the future. On the whole though the 9% raster difference for 16:9 is much less than the 31% for a stack. So blending is the way to go.


Has anyone measured the CR for a Stack vs a Blend as well for the same screen size?


----------



## ecrabb

Don't forget the physical setups with each, either. Unless it's a floor-ceiling config, you're going to have to drive geometry pretty hard in a stack to compensate for the off-center projection angle, so it better be a good projector. Then, there's odd-shaped wear somebody mentioned.


On the other hand, with the blend, you can do a nice easy, in-spec physical setup with, as MTyson already mentioned, a shorter throw (for the same screen size). A blend would be a real home-run for me because I could have bigger picture, but move the projectors forward from where a single one would be, which would give me more headroom and a bigger, brighter, and sharper picture.


So, I would be ALL OVER a blend setup if only there was an inexpensive way to capture and blend an external HD source like HD-DVD, DirecTV, xbox, etc. through the HTPC. Even my two lowly 12xx's would look super-sweet. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon and I don't want to lose the flexibility of input signals just to blend.


Somebody figure out the capture end of this - I want to use both my projectors...BADLY!


SC


----------



## YONEXSP

Watch this thread, as the Rentacoder project may come through. & Don't forget DVB-S & DVB-C cards will allow you to output HD from Sats & DVB-T from terrestrial


----------



## welwynnick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *antorsae* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> A) Blending for 2.35 AR results in 88% raster usage.
> 
> B) Blending for 16:9 AR results in raster 66% usage.
> 
> C) Stacking 2.35 AR results in 57% raster usage.
> 
> D) Stacking 16:9 AR results in 75% raster usage.
> 
> 
> With 2.35AR blending is the clear winner.
> 
> BR - Andres



Agree with all those figures, but there is another reason why blending HAS to be 2.35 to be worthwhile.


If you configure a blend pair for a 16:9 screen, and then show a 2.35 film, the raster useage falls to 51% (=2/3x1.78/2.35). The same number of scan lines have to be closer together on the tubes. This is a huge waste compared with 88%.


However, if you watch a 16:9 film on a 2.35 blend pair, the PQ should be just as good as a 16:9 blend config. Same line spacing on the tube.


Of course all that is irrelevent if HD DVD and BD films happen to be 16:9, but if they are anything like my DVDs, I bet MOST will be 2.35. It's a no-brainer.


Nick


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hi all,


In my floor mounted set-up, I had to tilt the projectors up fairly significantly to get the image at a reasonable height (about 8-12" off the floor at the bottom of the screen). It wasn't beyond the range of the sheimpflug adjustments on my Marquees, but it did push the bounds of my keystone adjustment. I think this has to be considered before any decisions are made based on phosphor wear and overall phosphor usage.


I think real-world design has to factor into the analysis. While I would have liked to have put my projectors on a low table to maximize phosphor usage (at the standard 10 degree bubble of the Marquees) that would, unfortunately, have obstructed the bottom of the screen at a reasonable seating distance. Hence the tilt, and the correspondingly overall less phosphor usage.


In my set-up, which maximizes the vertical raster of the tubes, material at 16x9 is almost a bit too big when sitting behind the projectors. It's enveloping, but a bit awkward to watch as well. So I move back a bit. However, with 2.35 material from the same distance, the screen is very comfortable to watch, but even at 120" wide (and about 55" high) not quite "cinematic."


You could keep the same throw distance on the projectors and simply move them farther apart, making a 55" high 2.35 image, and retain the overall brightness and vertical resolution capabilities with a 16x9 image while making the 2.35 image that much more enveloping. This would make a single coffee table/hushbox for the two projectors awkward, to say the least, but preserving the size and character of both 2.35 and 1.78 film presentations at comfortable viewing distances would be worth it, in my book. I guess this wouldn't be an issue with ceiling mounted projectors.


So the upshot is, for blended projectors, I put my vote in for an overall 2.35 constant height geometry. This makes masking easier for 1.78 and 1.33 presentation, maintains vertical phosphor usage, makes for impressive 2.35 and comfortable 1.78 presentations at a functional viewing distance. Of course, this assumes HD-8 lenses on 8" tubes - a shorter thow or smaller screen (given full vertical raster usage) would make the "up bubble" on the projector greater and generally change the whole equation.


I think the 9" HD-10x throw is comparable to the HD-8 throw, but I may be wrong. One way or the other, it's pretty wild seeing a resolved 1920x1080 image with true blacks on a big screen. I would encourage anyone who can to give this a spin.


Slarti


----------



## MadMrH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *welwynnick* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Of course all that is irrelevent if HD DVD and BD films happen to be 16:9, but if they are anything like my DVDs, I bet MOST will be 2.35. It's a no-brainer.
> 
> 
> Nick



I bought a 16:9 fixed and expensive screen...............



I have considered a 2.35 screen, and maybe with the blend I will be FORCED to buy one......


lets see.........




Gotta get the blend sorted first.......


----------



## Tim in Phoenix




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You're gonna get uneven wear no matter what unless you rarely use anything but one specific aspect ratio. A blend setup will cause much worse uneven wear than stacking. With stacking your just overlaying one image onto the other. With a blended setup you are lowering the output of the blendzone to make it blend in with the rest of the image. This means that in time the proejctors will be virtually unusable by themselves in a non blended set up.




I have to disagree strongly with you here, and having set up several side stacks. You are never using the full phosphor height with side stacking, and you are throwing wicked trapezoid shapes from all tubes, the near side out of any tube is taller than center and spread wide, then squished for height and width at the far side; the imbalances must be seen to be appreciated. The far side for each tube sees accelerated wear perhaps twice what the closer side sees; smaller height on the tube face and slowing of the electron beam also.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tim* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have to disagree strongly with you here, and having set up several side stacks. You are never using the full phosphor height with side stacking, and you are throwing wicked trapezoid shapes from all tubes, the near side out of any tube is taller than center and spread wide, then squished for height and width at the far side; the imbalances must be seen to be appreciated. The far side for each tube sees accelerated wear perhaps twice what the closer side sees; smaller height on the tube face and slowing of the electron beam also.



If I stack I have an idea to stack one CRT upright and use a first surface mirror placed just under the lenses of the top CRT. That way I don't have to have one way to the side.


----------



## ecrabb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If I stack I have an idea to stack one CRT upright and use a first surface mirror placed just under the lenses of the top CRT. That way I don't have to have one way to the side.



I'm not picturing that configuration... are they ceiling or floor mounted? Could you describe it a little more?


I've thought and thought... and thought some more about how to configure the projectors where they don't burn valuable floor space, occlude the view (mounted on the ceiling), use a big mirror, or use nasty geometry correction... to no avail. For most residential-type rooms with lower ceilings, there's always some wrong with every thing you try with anything but a side-by-side stack... which, of course, is why a blend setup would be so awesome.


SC


----------



## YONEXSP

I'd love to hear from Art on his experience with his Stacked NEC PG's, as he is th eonly one I know who had such a configuration. Also, remember that I don't expect to retubed the 2 machines anytime soon (3+ yrs). After that it's over to the grey side I'm sure. So at this stage my 2 XG's are disposable after what ever hell I decide to put them through










Also, I'm still kiddy watching a 10.5ft wide 2.35:1 screen with normal Brightness etc. It is a sight to behold


----------



## GlenF




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *antorsae* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes. I agree. Let me throw in some number I crunched regarding *effective* phosphor usage:
> 
> 
> A) Blending for 2.35 AR results in 88% raster usage.
> 
> B) Blending for 16:9 AR results in raster 66% usage.
> 
> C) Stacking 2.35 AR results in 57% raster usage.
> 
> D) Stacking 16:9 AR results in 75% raster usage.
> 
> 
> With 2.35AR blending is the clear winner. In addition, you can do crazy resolutions like >1000 lines horizontal and 72 Hz and still be within the limits of the PJ specs (in the case of a 9500 Ultra machine). Why do I think 72Hz is important? Less rainbow effect (due to uneven phosphor decay rates) and ability to use WinDVD Trimension plugin to do temporal frame interpolation (movies look like video, I love it!).
> 
> 
> BR - Andres



\\


One other thing to note, you are using 88% phosphor compared to 57% AND each PJ is lighting up MUCH less square footage on the screen.

Isn't there an inverse square law thingo that means that with each projector throwing a smaller image you would get a much brighter picture (in ADDITION to the extra phosphor) or have I got it wrong?


----------



## YONEXSP

Does anyone know if the VLC filter will work with a Quadro card? As the Filter does both the overlap & Blend. The quadro card already supports overlap (the blend not so good). I am wondering if a Quadro card with VLC will allow the use of a Blended PJ setup using the Quadro card, then VLC for movie playback (If you get my drift).


----------



## YONEXSP

Also, anyway to get the VLC filter to work with FFDshow?


----------



## Mark_A_W

I would definitely go for the blend setup.


I stacked two Xtras, one on the ceiling, one on a stand, just for fun- so I didn't have the same trapezoid image problems you get with a side by side stack.


But I lost my prime seat.


And more importantly, I found that as the projectors are under different thermal conditions (one on ceiling continually warming up for ages as room heats - even with a ceiling extraction fan) that it was VERY DIFFICULT to keep them lined up.


Neither projected drifts much at all, but when you combine them, and they are drifting in different ways....there goes your detail for HD material.


Now with a blend, both ceiling mounted in well ventilated hushbox, I think you'd have a much better result, for so many reasons: Raster usage, stability, seat in prime spot, minimal loss of detail - just to name a few.


Floor mounting sucks bigtime anyway.


Mark


----------



## YONEXSP

If the VLC Plugin could be ported to work with MyTheatre software ( http://www.dvbcore.com/ )


then it would be able to use the Blended PJ's with HDTV from Satellites etc


----------



## YONEXSP

So a quick port to FFDshow, then DVBCore. that would take care of HDTV and DVD's, .ts files. Only thing left would be HD DVD's (I'd bet money that will be able to be played back from TT soon enough)


Looks like the feasibility of a hTPC for HD & a Blened is back on the menu. Also, the rentacoder project is back on track again after my short break. I also have a call with cyvix this week to discuss getting an evaluation unit of the xed.1 External blender. So all is starting to shape up nicely










just need to make my new screen, get an extron box to use with the xed.1 for Non-PC sources.


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hi Yonexp, the VLC filter does "work" with the Quadro cards in that you can run the software from a Quadro card - or any dual head card, for that matter. But using the Quadro's overlap function in conjunction with the VLC filter wouldn't work, because the VLC filter assumes two distinct windows/monitors that can be blended in the projector/screen space. Functionally, the Quadro software provides upstream software with one monitor space. The VLC software on top of the Quadro blend would be redundant.


VLC uses an "all-in-one" software approach from the media aquisition point to display. Further, I believe the programming is done in OpenGL. FFdshow is a Directshow filter which, if I'm not mistaken, makes use of Direct3D libraries/programming. I'm not a programmer, but I would think that this would make the port of the VLC plugin to DirecShow non-trivial. Unfortunately, so too was the software example given in the "Edge Blending with Commodity Projectors" code written in OpenGL. Given the amount of work that M. Cocquebert must have put into this filter, I'm not banking on a DirectShow port.


That said, there are libraries/functions within the DirectShow that hold the promise of a blending solution. Within the VMR9 renderer, itself a DirectShow filter, there is a alpha-blending function. If I'm not mistaken, this was the original intent of the VMR, or Video Mixing Renderer, and its primary function - to enable easy mixing of multiple video streams (and, by extension, static images) with easily defineable alpha values. This function, as it suits our purposes, can be accessed to some degree through ffdshow's "Bitmap Overlay" function, as well as a plugin by a company called MontiVision. That said, I haven't been able to make these work, though someone may. I don't have the ability to write a custom VMR9 renderer, but I suspect that coding the functional luma roll-off, via a transform filter or a bitmap overlay, would be a snap for someone who is familiar with this sort of programming.


There is a cog in the works, though. DirectShow as it exists today was initially criticized by the community of programmers as being too content protection friendly. The sad (for us) fact is that Microsoft has been positioning DirectShow as a content delivery platform rather than a video manipulation platform to varying degrees since its inception - which hasn't, to this point, made it a less elegant solution for manipulating video data or easily accessing the interface. With Vista, though, they are going to basically scrap DirectShow in its current incarnation in favor of a protected content path, which, I guess, will make all of these video hijinx a great deal more difficult. Especially with anything we would want to split and blend, like HD-DVD, Blue-Ray, CableCards or IPTV.


Hence the beauty of the DiVentix and to a lesser degree, the Quadro approach (if it worked properly). These, functionally, work outside of the raw-data space, and tread less on the toes of the protected content modality. I'm not holding my breath for a Quadro that will display protected content, blend properly, and be CRT friendly. I'm also not personally interested in high bandwith analog HD aquisition, which would entail three DA/AD conversions before presentation.


I think the silver lining is HD-SDI. The price of PC HD-SDI I/O solutions have plummeted in the past few years, notably with the BlackMagic series of cards. There are cheap and robust Analog HD to HD-SDI solutions from AJA, amongst others. VLC has always been at the forefront (outside of the professional sphere) of video data aquisition on personal computers and I think its handy that Yonexp has demonstrated a competent blend using this software. That said, I can't find anything on anyone trying the VLC/HD-SDI combination, so if anyone is going to do this soon it's going to have to be someone here.


YoneXP, if you're still reading, I can send you the details of the GraphEdit graph that would work as a DirectShow front-end for the Cyvix box. I also have Extron interfaces coming out of my ears - maybe I can help you out.


Slarti


----------



## welwynnick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I stacked two Xtras, one on the ceiling, one on a stand, just for fun- so I didn't have the same trapezoid image problems you get with a side by side stack.
> 
> 
> But I lost my prime seat.
> 
> 
> And more importantly, I found that as the projectors are under different thermal conditions (one on ceiling continually warming up for ages as room heats - even with a ceiling extraction fan) that it was VERY DIFFICULT to keep them lined up.



Very good points. I suppose if you had a blend pair on the floor, then the prime seat is in between them, but that's not practical or feasible with anyone who is married, got kids, prone to clumsiness, lots of reasons....


Moreover, the optimum position for a blend pair is probably IN FRONT of the sitting position, closer to the screen. This is itself will surely ease some of the focus, geometry, convergence and alignment problems that all become more apparent and difficult to control when you are projecting a wide aspect picture from further away.


Nick


----------



## welwynnick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MadMrH* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I bought a 16:9 fixed and expensive screen...............



Yeah, I know.










But all TVs are 16:9 these days.


And did you SEE that incredible 2.35 screen Yonexsp had set up - just like a cinema!


Nick


----------



## antorsae

Hi - Questions for those who have already tried it: what resolutions and blending zone are you using for 2.35:1 AR?


BR - Andres


----------



## YONEXSP

2 x 1280x1024 And 2 x 1600x1200 I have just used the default blending zone that was setup with the plugin. I guess it's probably 15% or so


----------



## YONEXSP

Question: Dosn't VLC support video capture devices? Could I not capture incoming video and use VLC to display it, and so have use of the Panoramix filter?


----------



## YONEXSP

Assuming I could find a cheap Component/DVI Video Capture device


----------



## YONEXSP

Wonder if someone has this & can test it? http://www.avid.com/products/liquidpro/


----------



## Sinobi

From a brief lookthrough it looks like it only sypports HD via firewire.

I might be wrong though...


Henrik


----------



## YONEXSP

Not through the Component connection?


----------



## ecrabb

I could be wrong (it's happened before - really!







), but last I knew, the Blackmagic Decklink was the cheapest way to capture uncompressed analog HD - at a cool $1000 US.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hd/ 


SC


----------



## YONEXSP

found that Avid liquidpro for $699, and if you own Ulead only $459 or something with rebate


----------



## YONEXSP

Having said that, does anyone have one that the could try with VLC?


----------



## ecrabb

I'm about 95% sure that Liquid Pro and the inexpensive breakout box hardware does NOT capture analog HD. For that, you'd need to step up to Liquid Chrome HD, which adds the serious hardware necessary to capture analog HD.


I think the products break like this:

Liquid - 1394 capture (DV/HDV) from host

Liquid Pro - *Analog* SD box (with 1394 for DV, HDV, etc.)

Liquid Chrome - Analog SD/HD hardware with SD/HD-SDI, too.


I think Liquid Chrome is $3000'ish USD. Sorry to rain on the parade, but analog HD capture still isn't a cheap prospect - as far as I'm aware.


SC


----------



## slartibartfasst

AJA HD10AVA: Analog HD to HDSDI for ~$1k.

Decklink HD Extreme: ~$1K.

HD-SDI serializer chips: peanuts.

A reliable engineer with HD-SDI experience: ?

Six full rasters throwing a ginormous, fully resolved image: Priceless.


----------



## YONEXSP

So, is it possible then to use one of these with VLC? Anyone able to try it?


----------



## YONEXSP

One problem with VLC I found, it keeps flshing the desktop everynow & then, very annoying


----------



## dokworm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Question: Dosn't VLC support video capture devices? Could I not capture incoming video and use VLC to display it, and so have use of the Panoramix filter?



If you find a HD capture card that is supported then yes it would work.


----------



## YONEXSP

If a few small bugs could be fixed with the filter then I would definately be happy with this solution. Along with a Vid Capture card I'd be good to go


----------



## YONEXSP

The function that seems to be at fault that I see, is the automatic Aspect Ratio detection. I'd be happier if it was manual only. The I could set the aspect ration myself, even use the zoom function for 1.85:1 movies etc.


----------



## dokworm

What about this beastie?
http://www.promax.com/Products/Detail/130087


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> One problem with VLC I found, it keeps flshing the desktop everynow & then, very annoying



I have found the same problem. If I run the two images in windowed mode rather than fullscreen and move the windows around, they flicker and jump back to their original position every so often instead. Seems to be related to the panoramix plugin as it doesn't happen when that is not enabled.


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

Ben, that's what i see as well. i think there is some sort of stream analysis to make sure the optimum aspect ration is maintained. I wonder if there is some way to turn it off. Perhpas not selecting Default under aspect ration will work? i will check tonight.


----------



## benwillcox

I have done some testing with this and it seems that the aspect ratio control does not solve the problem









In addition, none of the manually selected ratios appear to be the same as the 'default' setting which seems a bit strange to me..


There is a pattern to the problem though, as it appears in the same place every time on certain material. And then on others the problem doesn't appear at all..


Oh, during my testing though I discovered another issue, which is that due to the tilt required to get the image 1 foot from the floor, this means the highest point of the projector is 17 inches. As my ceiling is only 7.5 feet, when it's mounted up there I'm going to get hit in the face by 2 projectors when I walk into the room









In fact, I will have to be very careful about the height of my riser, as it could be that the projectors actually obscure the view of the screen.


Ben


----------



## slartibartfasst

I had that flashing problem in spades on my PIII (which played movies like a slideshow as a result). I haven't seen it once on a MacBook Pro Windows install, though that doesn't really serve the purpose. What sort of computers are you two using? Are you running in fullscreen or in windowed mode?


Does anyone know how the deinterlacing is done in VLC when the option in the software is set to "none?"


----------



## YONEXSP

I'm running a XP 3500+ 1 Gig Ram, 6600GT


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benwillcox* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have found the same problem. If I run the two images in windowed mode rather than fullscreen and move the windows around, they flicker and jump back to their original position every so often instead. Seems to be related to the panoramix plugin as it doesn't happen when that is not enabled.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ben



Hi,


Thanks to all contributions ...


The "flashing bug" is "normal" with auto aspect detection, VLC must destroy windows then create another with good ratio ... BTW this feature will integrate "crop" module and not "Panoramix" in September, because I talk to VLC team to integrate Panoramix and modify Crop modules.


To fix this problem, you can select a manual ratio (x 1000) in advanced option or use different values to "number of images, lines ..."


In my test, I have some changes (0 to 4) per movie (except between 1.77 and 1.85 ratio, in this case I use manual ratio). Moreover, I use black desktop without icons&taskbar, so when ratio change I have a black screen during several frames (depend of CPU).


Best regards.


----------



## YONEXSP

Cedric, what would the ratio be for 2.35:1 Movies?


----------



## YONEXSP

Also, to clrify, I get the screen flashes in 'Fullscreen' mode


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Cedric, what would the ratio be for 2.35:1 Movies?



2350



> Quote:
> Also, to clrify, I get the screen flashes in 'Fullscreen' mode



Yes, fullscreen or windowed mode have the same behaviour (destroy & create) depending of VLC design (it's the same thing if you turn on/off desinterlace plugin).


----------



## YONEXSP

So just select manual ration & I am good to go, no more flashing?

Also, have you looked at making this a FFDshow plugin? Or is making it a DirectX filter a lot o'work?


----------



## YONEXSP

Also, what is the default overlap area? 10% 15% etc etc..?


----------



## YONEXSP

OK, figured it out. Just double your inout resolutions.


So I am feeding it 1280x1024 for both screens. So the manuel resolution would be 2560x2040. this gives the full output for a 2.35:1 DVD, very very cool










Now if someone can test a Video Capture card with VLC that would be great


----------



## YONEXSP

Damn!!! It still flashed! I'm lost, what does the default aspect ratio equal?


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So just select manual ration & I am good to go, no more flashing?
> 
> Also, have you looked at making this a FFDshow plugin? Or is making it a DirectX filter a lot o'work?



Yes, just set "Ratio Max (x1000)" to 2405 (to carry out 2.40:1 movies) and "Manual ratio" to 2350


For FFDshow and all others players (directX), I have the same problem :


* dual screen & overlay is not very compliant (depend of card, OS ...)


* we need to use VMR9 and I don't know if a such thing (two windows with

splitted & overlapped video) is possible ...



> Quote:
> Also, what is the default overlap area? 10% 15% etc etc..?



The Plugin compute automatically the length of overlap area (from "Ratio Max" and desktop resolution, and we can reduce this by set "length of the overlapping area (in %)"



> Quote:
> Damn!!! It still flashed! I'm lost, what does the default aspect ratio equal?



Have you check (in Panoramix filter menu) "Advanced options" and set the two options "Manual ratio"&"Ratio Max (x1000)" ?

Can you send me all panoramix options values ... to [email protected] 


Thanks.


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hello M. Cocquebert:


VMR9 allows split and overlapped video in two separate windows. I can send you Graphedit graph that creates this sort of effect. Functionally, the demultiplexed video thread is sent to the Microsoft InfTee filter, which splits the video into two identical 1920x1080 video streams. These streams pass the data into two "cropping" filters which, in my case, split the video into two 1280x1080 data streams, one displaying pixels 1-1280 and the second displaying pixels 640-1920. These threads are passed to two separate VMR9 renderers, which display the video in two 1280x1080 windows. A transform filter on each of the parallel threads that creates a luma roll-off should be the last piece needed for a DirectShow blending solution; this, however, is beyond me.


I am currently using your Panoramix filter on a test bed Core Duo computer with a Radeon x1600 card. I don't see any of the problems with video flashes on this computer, but I do see it frequently of another, slower computer also equipped with your software. Yesterday I played back both a DVD and a high definition file using VLC and your Panoramix filter and did not see one flash in about four hours of viewing.


Thanks again for this excellent software.


As a follow up to a previous comment that I had made about deinterlacing in VLC: I didn't notice a single deinterlacing artifact for the entire course of watching the two movies mentioned above, despite looking for them. I don't know how VLC effects deinterlacing when the internal software deinterlacing option is set to off, but I don't believe it to be an issue, at least on the video card I was using.


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *slartibartfasst* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hello M. Cocquebert:
> 
> 
> VMR9 allows split and overlapped video in two separate windows. I can send you Graphedit graph that creates this sort of effect. Functionally, the demultiplexed video thread is sent to the Microsoft InfTee filter, which splits the video into two identical 1920x1080 video streams. These streams pass the data into two "cropping" filters which, in my case, split the video into two 1280x1080 data streams, one displaying pixels 1-1280 and the second displaying pixels 640-1920. These threads are passed to two separate VMR9 renderers, which display the video in two 1280x1080 windows. A transform filter on each of the parallel threads that creates a luma roll-off should be the last piece needed for a DirectShow blending solution; this, however, is beyond me.



Yes can you send me your graph, I'll give a student project to test this way (I'm teacher in a engineer school) but it will be for 2007...



> Quote:
> As a follow up to a previous comment that I had made about deinterlacing in VLC: I didn't notice a single deinterlacing artifact for the entire course of watching the two movies mentioned above, despite looking for them. I don't know how VLC effects deinterlacing when the internal software deinterlacing option is set to off, but I don't believe it to be an issue, at least on the video card I was using.



As far as I'm concerned, ffmpeg have a good desinterlace built-in for movie (2:3 or 2:2 pulldown) but If you have video material, you must have Desinterlace filter (Blend option is best).


----------



## YONEXSP

Is there a way to get VLC to use another codec liek the NVidia Purevideo decoder?


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is there a way to get VLC to use another codec liek the NVidia Purevideo decoder?



No way, all decoder is built-in (for muti-OS).


----------



## Graham Johnson

I wouldnt bother swapping decoders in VLC. The one its uses is pretty damn good. In fact after using FFD show I actually prefer the VLC look.


Interesting thing. I noticed was that is you leave the VLC player deinterlacing at off the picture quality is very much better than with any of the other deinterlacing options.


----------



## YONEXSP

Watching the incredibles right now with my eldest boy on a on my temp 137" Scope screen with 2 blended XG's using the VLC software. Thanks to Benjamin (author of the blending plugin) all the issues I was having ahve been fixed. This thing rocks!!! This for me breaths new life into 8" CRT's!! Nothing like 2720*1200 resolution fully resolved on 8" machines !!


Benjamin, merci beucoup!


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hello M. Cocquebert: I will certainly send you a copy of the graph. It makes use of Microsoft and Elecard DirectShow filters, though I would imagine that anybody able to code a luma roll off would be able to code the split and overlap. Do you know if there is any form of 2:3 pulldown/IVTC within VLC that can be applied to sources captured from DirectShow capture filters? I.E. if I were to to capture a 480i60 source via SDI, could I apply any 2:3 pulldown to the video stream?


Hello Graham: Have you ever compared the internal VLC decoders to the DScaler5 MPEG decoders? Perhaps to the PureVideo decoders? If so, do you have a preference, and why?


To Yonexsp: Having reconciled your problems with the screen flashes, can you see any flaws in the blending effect? I only ask because perhaps your eyes are better than mine; I certainly can't.


And thanks to all who have contributed to this effort in various ways; that images of this size and fidelity can be seen on 10 year old projectors and open-source software speaks to the utility of these forums and those who contribute to them. You have cured me (if only for the moment) of that itch that is so hard to scratch.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I have been using the VLC player for about 18 months. Apart from a few flaky play issues. It managed to play every video format file I threw at it including WMV-HD files.


I also installed the Dscaler FFD show combination. Compared to the Dscaler version I was using ( and keep in mind I didnt use any enhancing techniques with Dscaler).


The VLC player in my mind was the better player in terms of sharpness.


What I did notice was that the best quality signal was if you set the VLC player to deinterlace Off. There was a sharp degradation in sharpness if you had it set to anywhere but here.


It was very noticable on the 1292.


I have no time for Theatertech, Power DVD. I also tried the Nvidia player it was good but not better.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Deinterlace = off is probably weave, which is what you want for films.


Turning it on probably turns bob on, which halves the resolution for a film source.


Mark


----------



## MadMrH

Man I cant wait to try this out...........


I have 2 matched 1209s units on route here, once arrived, on the blending test rig they go and then VLC gets a chance to shine........


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *slartibartfasst* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hello M. Cocquebert: I will certainly send you a copy of the graph. It makes use of Microsoft and Elecard DirectShow filters, though I would imagine that anybody able to code a luma roll off would be able to code the split and overlap. Do you know if there is any form of 2:3 pulldown/IVTC within VLC that can be applied to sources captured from DirectShow capture filters? I.E. if I were to to capture a 480i60 source via SDI, could I apply any 2:3 pulldown to the video stream?
> 
> 
> Hello Graham: Have you ever compared the internal VLC decoders to the DScaler5 MPEG decoders? Perhaps to the PureVideo decoders? If so, do you have a preference, and why?
> 
> 
> To Yonexsp: Having reconciled your problems with the screen flashes, can you see any flaws in the blending effect? I only ask because perhaps your eyes are better than mine; I certainly can't.
> 
> 
> And thanks to all who have contributed to this effort in various ways; that images of this size and fidelity can be seen on 10 year old projectors and open-source software speaks to the utility of these forums and those who contribute to them. You have cured me (if only for the moment) of that itch that is so hard to scratch.



The only issue with the blend arae, is that neither of my PJ's is correctly calibarted at the moment, so they show completely different colours. Ben may be up here from Ottawa in 2 weeks with his Colour analyzer which should cure that.


Apart from that obvious neccessity, it is still really hard to see the blend zone most of the time. It really is an imprssive piece of software.


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Watching the incredibles right now with my eldest boy on a on my temp 137" Scope screen with 2 blended XG's using the VLC software. Thanks to Benjamin (author of the blending plugin) all the issues I was having ahve been fixed. This thing rocks!!! This for me breaths new life into 8" CRT's!! Nothing like 2720*1200 resolution fully resolved on 8" machines !!
> 
> 
> Benjamin, merci beucoup!



Thanks a lot for my son (Benjamin, I have used his internet acount, because I'm on vacation)


----------



## YONEXSP

Thx Cedric then it is


----------



## benwillcox

Hey,


picked up a second 801s today, so got a chance to try the blending with VLC for real! Spent a bit of time getting both of them lined up and doing a rough convergence.


With VLC and panoramix on its default settings the blend zone looked rather dark, however I just changed the attenuation setting (I think thats the one) in the panoramix options from 50% to 15% and it looked pretty much spot on, i.e. i can't see it.


The main issue now is that both PJs arn't colour balanced correctly so one side looks a tad warmer than the other - but I don't think its anything that can't be adjusted with a bit of tweaking.


Thanks Cedric for making this possible!

Oh, one thing I was wondering is whether this plugin will work on the Linux version of VLC? I tried to compile 0.8.6 from svn but had problems - has anyone tried this?


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

Congrats Ben, post some pictures. I am sure there are lots of interesetd in parties in what 2 8" ES machines can look like in a blended solution.


----------



## ecrabb

You guys are driving me nuts. I have a lowly pair of projectors (1271 and 1272) sitting RIGHT next to each other on a desk in my basement... and no time to try this!!! Besides, they should really go on a 10' screen to do it justice, and all I have are some 4x8 sheets.


I think I'll have to try it this weekend just for fun, though. Any ideas on something practically free (or at least really cheap) that I could try projecting on besides a bed sheet (I hate the wrinkles)?


SC


----------



## dokworm

3Pass (blockout) fabric is very cheap, get some on a roll and try it out - it may well become your permanent screen.


----------



## YONEXSP

I made a screen with BO cloth this weekend. 3pass as Dok says. The gain is basically 1, it is actulay really good. Along with the lumber screws etc, total cost $60. Honesly, the extra $940 to get a 2.35:1 scope screen from Carad is a waste of money. You can buy some nice black velevt & make a nice frame for an extra $40 or so as well.


It looks stunning. The do that blend & post those pic's!!


----------



## benwillcox

I shall try and take some pics soon.


In the meantime I have some more observations. Previously I was projecting onto a newly plastered wall, so the swirl marks were hiding some detail - I've quickly rolled on a coat of white emulsion so I can see the image better.

Now I can see the blend zone, which I think is still mainly due to colour balance, BUT there seems to be a darker strip just on the right hand side of the blend, which is a bit strange.

I tried each PJ individually so I could see the fade out, and found that the left image fades to black on the RH side, but the right image fades a bit then seems to stop before it reaches black - so the overlap doesn't seem to be symmetrical for some reason. I think this is the reason for the dark strip I can see.


I seem to have to slightly adjust the image position of one PJ to get the alignment of the blend perfect when changing between different aspect ratio material. This possibly is becuase I don't have both PJs yet projecting at EXACTLY the same size, or some other mismatch like that, so I'm not too worried about this at the moment.


On panning scenes, or rolling credits, I can see that both images are not perfectly synchronised, i.e. there is a very slight lag on the second PJ. This could be down to the speed of my PC (I think its a 2.4GHz P4) or possibly the graphics card? The computer is not fast enough to play back HD material properly anyway and this lag is very apparant when trying! (Although VLC makes a better job of playing back WMVHD than WMP).


I discovered lots of controls to adjust the aspect ratio detection in the advanced settings of panoramix. So I'm able to tweak this now to avoid the 'flashing window' syndrome without having to set a fixed aspect ratio.


For some reason my graphics card (a Radeon something or other) doesn't want to display 1280x720 even using powerstrip, so at the moment I'm using [email protected] I'm not sure that the 801s can really resolve 1080p even using the full phosphor height, but 720p (actually 768) is very clear. Having said that, I havn't really put much effort into trying 1080p, I still have a little bit of phosphor height left to play with so it MAY be possible.


Thats enough playing for one day,


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## dokworm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I made a screen with BO cloth this weekend. 3pass as Dok says. The gain is basically 1, it is actulay really good. Along with the lumber screws etc, total cost $60. Honesly, the extra $940 to get a 2.35:1 scope screen from Carad is a waste of money. You can buy some nice black velevt & make a nice frame for an extra $40 or so as well.
> 
> 
> It looks stunning. The do that blend & post those pic's!!



And when you get used to the screen, paint the thing with some gesso or similar and it steps up another notch.


The extra brightness of the blend makes a 1.0 - 1.3 gain screen quite OK at large sizes, I'm thinking the blend might actually end up easier than the monster torus I was going to build.


----------



## YONEXSP

Thx Dok, I did that with my last screen. Made a nice blend. Have not gotten around to it yet. Just got a new Vid Card today, and soft modded into a Quadro 4000 to play with the Nvidia overlap & wot not.


----------



## benwillcox

OK, I have some pics. I put one more quick coat of white emulsion on the screen wall - don't know what gain this 'screen' is but I have some REALLY bad hot-spotting!


Projectors are only roughly setup, and they're not perfectly aligned either mechanically or electronically, but they're close enough for testing purposes.


The blend/colour matching is still not perfect but its better. I don't have access to a colour analyser so its all by eye at the moment. I found the blend improved when I used the default blend attenutation settings in panoramix but set the blend position to 75%.


It was quite difficult to reduce the appearance of the dark bar to the right of the blend I mentioned in an earlier post. One of the PJs has done 2700 hours, and the other 7500 hours, so one has more wear than the other. I'm wondering if there is something more complex happening such as whether the brightness linearity of the phosphor changes with increased wear, which might mean the blend on one side will not equally matched to the other?


Having said that, it now looks pretty good, and these pictures seem to show the blend zone clearer than with the naked eye. Screen size is 9 1/2 feet wide, sorry the pictures are quite low res and they are not framed very well!:











The blend area shows up very clearly on this image:




























So you can see there is still a lot of improvement to be made, but it is still very watchable even in this state. Im sure it would be a great deal easier with two identical projectors with brand new tubes.


Cheers,

Ben,


----------



## Graham Johnson

If you could colour balance those two projectors I am sure that blend would almost dissapear.


----------



## MadMrH

I agree, thats very very good............



Thats a Pair of Barco 801s as well right ???




Hey, dont panic about the differance in colour between the 2 Pjs - you will make Tim feel at home











Could you put up the conv. grids on both machines ???


I would like to see how close they currently are.


ALSO , any chance of a full white screen???


say a desktop from a pc ???


Cheers.


And, MEGA well done.


----------



## Gino AUS

Andy, why haven't you tried this yourself yet?


----------



## Tim in Phoenix

Say Ben


That is what, a DVD playing in the PC drive? What else have you tested with, any HD sources from external?


----------



## YONEXSP

I've tried HD 720p and Gladiator 1080i Both worked great with VLC


----------



## YONEXSP

Ben, Good going!!!


----------



## YONEXSP

For what it's worth I don't get the band in bright scenes like that so it's just a matter of tweaking the Panoramix parameters. As you point out, having 2 differently setup colour wise PJ's really does not help. I actually get a line in Black scenes, coz the G2 is not set on my PJ's properly, so it's all screwey colour etc wise.


----------



## Tim in Phoenix




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MadMrH* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, dont panic about the differance in colour between the 2 Pjs - you will make Tim feel at home



H


I _am_ at home, more often than not..........


----------



## benwillcox

Hi guys,


Andy, I'll take some photos of the grid and a white background for you this evening.

Thanks for your thread on avforums that made me want to try this out!

Yes these are a BG801s (2500hrs) and a BD801s (7500hrs). It it 'blending on a budget'!


Tim, they are DVDs streaming over the network from a fileserver. I just realised my computer is only a 1.5GHz machine, so that explains why my HD playback is not smooth! But, I'll try and see it I can get a picture of a 720p source. I'm definately going to upgrade my CPU so I can play HD stuff properly.


Here's a closeup of an alternating line pattern at 720p using Nokia monitor test (one white line, one black line, etc). At 2.35:1 ratio on a single 8" ES CRT you'd no way be able to see the individual lines at HD resolution.











I also tried 1080p, which was not so great. And I also realised that the BD cannot display this resolution even though the BG can - it just blanks the display, doh! Is there an easy way to mod the Data to a Graphics?


Ben


----------



## benwillcox

Oh and I forgot to mention, tweaking of the panoramix controls is a bit of a pain, as they don't adjust in realtime.

You have to make an adjustment, stop playback, and restart playback for the changes to take effect, so it is very time consuming to test all the controls.


Cedric is there anyway to get around this?


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

Ben, you don't need to set it to 1080P in a blended mode now, thats the beauty. With your machines you can run 2304x1024










When playing a 2.35:1 movie, it fills the screen so in effect your dsiplay is a higher resolution than a native 1080p machine. As you are using 1024 lines for the movie as opposed to somthing like 810 for a 1080p machine, as you show no black bars


----------



## dokworm

Great stuff, but looking at that screen, go buy a tin of matte ultra white paint!

That gloss surface must be driving you nuts!


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ben, you don't need to set it to 1080P in a blended mode now, thats the beauty. With your machines you can run 2304x1024
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When playing a 2.35:1 movie, it fills the screen so in effect your dsiplay is a higher resolution than a native 1080p machine. As you are using 1024 lines for the movie as opposed to somthing like 810 for a 1080p machine, as you show no black bars



Ahhhhhhh. Right. Well I think it probably was actually 1280x1024 I tried (I figured it was close enough), but I think what you are saying that becuase 1080p material at 16x9 is not anamorphic, when showing 2.35:1 1080p material there is only actually 810 lines of active image? And in fact, I've just remembered that the picture above is actually 768p, so I'm sure that 810 vertical lines would be achievable. Surely then it would be better to run at 1280x810 or something then for 1080p material?


But, you would still be compromising vertical resolution when playing back 16:9 1080p material though if I understand correctly? (Although I'm sure I can live with that!)


Cheers,

Ben


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dokworm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Great stuff, but looking at that screen, go buy a tin of matte ultra white paint!
> 
> That gloss surface must be driving you nuts!










yeah it is a bit! I intend to build a screen out of blackout cloth over a wooden frame as soon as I've stopped messing about with these projectors


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benwillcox* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Oh and I forgot to mention, tweaking of the panoramix controls is a bit of a pain, as they don't adjust in realtime.
> 
> You have to make an adjustment, stop playback, and restart playback for the changes to take effect, so it is very time consuming to test all the controls.
> 
> 
> Cedric is there anyway to get around this?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ben



Ohhhh, I want that to!


----------



## cocquebert




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benwillcox* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Oh and I forgot to mention, tweaking of the panoramix controls is a bit of a pain, as they don't adjust in realtime.
> 
> You have to make an adjustment, stop playback, and restart playback for the changes to take effect, so it is very time consuming to test all the controls.
> 
> 
> Cedric is there anyway to get around this?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ben
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, I want that to!
Click to expand...


Sorry, no way. It's depend on VLC design: all controls in a plug-in (not only Panoramix) aren't in realtime.

From my point of view, it's the principal imperfection of VLC.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benwillcox* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It was quite difficult to reduce the appearance of the dark bar to the right of the blend I mentioned in an earlier post. One of the PJs has done 2700 hours, and the other 7500 hours, so one has more wear than the other. I'm wondering if there is something more complex happening such as whether the brightness linearity of the phosphor changes with increased wear, which might mean the blend on one side will not equally matched to the other?



For the best blend result, you must have the same luminance, color & geometry for PJs.

If you have an older than the other, you must to calibrate from the older.


----------



## MadMrH

The swop of data to grapgics as 2 or 3 boards within the PJ and the controller,


I have done that to an 801s in the past.


I also have SCHEIMPFLUG adjustment setup for Barco 8 inch units


it fits 801, 801s,808,808s,1208 etc....


Ben PM me I think I have 2 sets available......


----------



## MadMrH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gino AUS* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Andy, why haven't you tried this yourself yet?




Well I spent most of my time working with the Nvidia system - I have now STOPPED that quest. it is possible BUT Nvidia need to add some gamma control that is missing, till then it wont work correctly.


At the mo I have about 18 days to wait till MY NEW PAIR of 1209s units arrive, then VLC will be tested and run here.


It looks very good, and I have hope answers to my needs.....


Time (as always) will tell.




I got side tracked recently when my new hifi kit arrived, thats not all installed yet but getting there......


----------



## YONEXSP

the xed.1 will arrive soon here for testing. It is actually on the plane from Norway today







, hand carried by the N. American rep


----------



## slartibartfasst

Ahoy hoy, Mr. Mad.


Don't give up on the nVidia solution yet. I had pretty much done so because I couldn't figure out how to make a bitmap work as a luma attenuation table when overlayed via a DirectShow filter; it would simply overlay all of the parts of the bitmap with no transparency. However, this AviSynth filter does just that; shades of gray are increasingly translucent as they get lighter, and vice versa. I have a nice 1920x1080 bitmap for my particular blend, but my computer is a dog and runs everything at about 10 frames a second. It's kind of kludgey, but the blend is closer than it was before.


I think that the nVidia solution and, by extension, the Cyviz approach has one or two advantages. Setting up and tuning the blend becomes much easier when you can use computer-based test patterns to line everything up and fine-tune the geometry. I suppose this could be done with video-based patterns, but I have far more computer test patterns than video ones. Further, you can use the whole suite of DirectShow and ffdshow filters (such as noise reduction, scaling, sharpening etc) with the Quadros, which I find makes a visible difference in 120" wide DVD presentations. 720x480 really does need some work to look good at that size. Maybe VLC can do this? I don't know, and haven't had time to look.


That said, VLC has one huge advantage: it works, now. I don't mean to look a gift horse in the mouth; I'm incredibly grateful to have access to this software. To Ben: my projectors are calibrated as well as I can, colorwise, with a Spyder2Pro and an enthusiast's eye. I don't see any irregularities in the Panoramix blend, so I would submit that normalizing the color, gamma and output (black and white) of your projectors might make the difference. I didn't touch the advanced options; I just changed the intensity of the blend zone after changing the width to 1773/2500 for my 16x9 screen.


To all with blend set-ups: How are you physically setting up the projectors? Are you running into issues with physical projector placement? That is to say, how are you keeping the projectors out of the line of sight of your viewers? On my floor mounted Marquees, I'm almost maxing my keystone adjustment, and I am absolutely maxing my C-linearity (or is it S-lin?) to make the middle of the image appear at the vertical center of the screen. I think I'm also pushing the limits of my sheimpflug; I just noticed yesterday a little bit of optical softness on the very top of one of my projectors that I'm not sure I can tune out.


I noticed, in Tim's blending pictures with Antorsae, that the projectors seem to be mounted on a low table. I can see how that would maximize raster usage by minimizing keystone, but I can't quite see how this would be practical in a home-theater environment. I think this may take a Clarence-like Visio drawing to illustrate, but I have no idea of how to go about this; perhaps someone can give me a suggestion on a program to use?


Best of luck to everyone committed enough to lug around two of these three eyed beasts, and a good day to everyone else.


Slarti


----------



## dokworm

One of these guys may have a HD capture card to try with VLC
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=697113


----------



## benwillcox

Some more pics:


Here's the white screens, it's obvious the colours are way out! I was very surprised to notice on this pic the horizontal bar at the bottom of the left screen - I have never seen this before, but I guess its a wear pattern from an old 16:9 raster. You cannot see this in real life, its amazing how much the digital camera shows up the defects!











Heres the convergence grids, sorry I had a little bit of camera shake here so the lines are not that clear:











And finally a picture of the 720p TS WMV HD trailer:


----------



## Mark_A_W

Ben, that line at the bottom on the LH pj is caused by the camera interacting with the scanrate, it's not wear.


In fact, the yellow colour of the whole LH side is a camera artifact.


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ben, that line at the bottom on the LH pj is caused by the camera interacting with the scanrate, it's not wear.
> 
> 
> In fact, the yellow colour of the whole LH side is a camera artifact.



Ah, that would explain why I've never seen the line before! In actual fact the left side does look a different colour, I think I will have to invest in some kind of colour calibrator.



Cedric, if I may ask a question about your panoramix plugin:

Is there any way to read the aspect ratio that panoramix has set from an external program, for example via the telnet or http interface of VLC?

What I would like to do is write daemon that can receive the aspect ratio detected by panoramix, which I can use to drive and set the position of my motorized masking system automatically (which is yet to be built!).


Thanks,

Ben.


----------



## YONEXSP

UPDATE!


cyrix xed.1 just arrived at the house, I will post 1st impressions etc later tonight & a few pic's of the unit










K./


----------



## YONEXSP

Ok, the xed.1 is a seriously well built piece of kit. Very ruggedized, made of brushed aluminium with heavy Duty Rubber ends. I'd guess it weighs about 2lbs (850g).


It is incredibly easy to use. Plug in the Input's, then the PJ's and away you go.


Connect a serial cable to it to config it with the edgemaster software. The device is autosensing the input. It also has in inbuilt GUI that you can configer from the keys on the side of the device.


All in a a very cool little package. Now for some quick screen shots.


One thing worth mentioning,Correct calibration of the 2 PJ's is a MUST!!! Mine are so different in colour calibration it was hard to correct. I tried my best in 5 mins, but a good calibration is necessary.


----------



## YONEXSP

another pic


----------



## pkarmouche




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> UPDATE!
> 
> 
> cyrix xed.1 just arrived at the house, I will post 1st impressions etc later tonight & a few pic's of the unit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> K./



Ken,


Great job! I know I speak for everyone here when I say THANKS for all your time & efforts toward a blending solution










Please elaborate on the connection you're using, and what video card. Also, what different combinations of connections do you figure are possible?


Lastly, what do you envision as the potential for HDDVD / BD playback. Even $2k is a lot if is is relatively future-limited.


Thanks again,


Paul


----------



## overclkr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> UPDATE!
> 
> 
> cyrix xed.1 just arrived at the house, I will post 1st impressions etc later tonight & a few pic's of the unit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> K./



Pretty damn cool although you can still make out the blend zone.


What's it gonna take to perfect this?


Cliff


----------



## YONEXSP

1) GeForce 6800GT softmodded to be a Quadro 4000 using RivaTuner

2) VGA into the xed.1, VGA out to the PJ's. Though they recommend DVI to the PJ's for some reason

3) TheaterTek for DVD media playback or ZoomPlayer


Hd SDI Input should solve the HD Question via a this card http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hd/


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> UPDATE!
> 
> 
> cyrix xed.1 just arrived at the house, I will post 1st impressions etc later tonight & a few pic's of the unit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> K./



Hey,

Thanks for posting the pics.

I've tried to look up more about this xed.1 using Google. I can find a company called Cyviz, and an xpo.1 costing £8000 UKP - is that it??


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

cyviz is the company but the xed.1 is their older model that has been discontinued. It uses 2 VGA Inouts, as opposed to the new version which uses 1 input & 2 outout's all DVI


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *overclkr* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Pretty damn cool although you can still make out the blend zone.
> 
> 
> What's it gonna take to perfect this?
> 
> 
> Cliff



Calibration of my 2 PJ's, the G2's are off, and they are completely different in colour settings.


The blend is easier to make out because of the Huge colour difference between the 2 PJ's. Though the control software did allow me to overcome some of these issues last night.


So far it's the easist & most adaptable solution I have used, as It even let me play Half-Life2 last night in 2176x1024 resolution!! Wayyy cooll!!!


When there is a decently priced Combined Hd DVD/BD Disc drive and the inevitable software to allow playback from a Non-HDCP PC, we are done as far as I am concerned. I already use a DVB-S card for my BEV HD Satellite broadcasts so everything works!


As I said, some help with calibration is appreciated, as I only have 4 weeks review time witht he Cyviz & Monday - Fridays are hard, so only 3 weekends, maybe 4.


I im in the York region North of Toronto if anyone is available


thx Ken./


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hi Ken,


Like Ben said, thanks for the review and for the continued efforts. I have a quick question, though. I couldn't see any projector color balance induced blend zone irregularities in your VLC/Panoramix pictures posted on 07/31/06. Do you think the VLC system is more forgiving in this regard? Second, how did you find the sharpness of this processor? Does the analog processing in this system change the character of the image at all?



PS, You have a PM.


----------



## YONEXSP

Number of issues. I did not have to use Overlap with the VLC solution, but I did with the cyviz, so I had to move the PJ's and they are not converged properly now, that has an effect.


The VLC solution works as well in blending, but it is harder to see during a Movie. I took some shots of Movies with the Cyviz and it also was next to impossible to see the blend in scenes.


Films are very forgiving for hiding defects. It's on the windows applications when problems really arise. Also, I fecked with the colour settings a lot as well to try and make a perfect blend. So the outcome was a am crap at that










I'l check sharpness tonight, I'll use the STMP test pattern i used before for testing resolution and get back to you.


----------



## mp20748




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'l check sharpness tonight, I'll use the STMP test pattern i used before for testing resolution and get back to you.



Yes, and also check to see how well it handels motion. Sharpness and the ability to handle motion is two very important things to look for once the signal is super processed and split, and then put back together on the screen.


----------



## YONEXSP

One thing I can't test is the ability to do the overlap as well. It only supports this via the DVI output. If I had access to 2 digital PJ's I could test this. Then you woul dnot need a quadro card, and should also work for non-PC sources if you used a matrox Dualheda in front of them (my thinking anyway)


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mp20748* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes, and also check to see how well it handels motion. Sharpness and the ability to handle motion is two very important things to look for once the signal is super processed and split, and then put back together on the screen.



Mike what should I look for? I ran a few movies etc, and it looked OK, but i don;t know what to look for.


as said before a 2nd pair of eyes would be good


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> cyviz is the company but the xed.1 is their older model that has been discontinued. It uses 2 VGA Inouts, as opposed to the new version which uses 1 input & 2 outout's all DVI



Thanks for the info. Looks good, with the obvious advantage that you are not limited to blending only material that can be played using VLC. However, assuming the price is similar to the xpo.1 at $11,000 US, are we not moving away from the 'cheap' solution that was envisaged at the start of the thread?

















Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

the price is actually quoted to me so far, with No haggling yet of $2500


----------



## antorsae

Hi Ken,


Great progress. I would like to thank you for all the effort and energy you are putting into this. My HT is not ready yet, and it looks that by the time it will be ready, there would be a myriad of blending solutions available... very very cool.


I have two questions regarding the xed unit:


1. Do you need one or two units?

2. Does it take DVI-D in?


Regards - Andres


----------



## YONEXSP

You only need one unit, and it takes VGA in, the xpo (newer version) takes DVI but I think that is $12,000. This unit is gonan be approx $2k, or less if we get more than 15 -20 I think we can get it for less, as it is a discontinued device.


----------



## YONEXSP

the xpo is used mainly for 3D applications, if you read the spec's on the site it's very cool! but way to pricey


----------



## YONEXSP

Does anyone have th elink for the Phillips test pattern generator? I woul like to make a stab this week at a rough calibration of my 2nd PJ which is horribly setup right now. Also I have to redo the astig on it to try & match the other, which is nailed doen perfect right now.


& again


LOOKING for someone in the Toronto region to come over to the house 1 day to help me get this whole mess setup lying on the floor setup better. etc etc, beer & pizza in it!


----------



## tactical

 http://www.mooneyass.com/testpatterns/


----------



## YONEXSP

thx


----------



## YONEXSP

OK Phase 2


What I did tonight


1) Tighter convergence, as tight as I could get it with the piss poor setup I have right now, non square to the screen PJ's and screen at an angle as it is sitting on the floor.


2) A stab at colour calibration. Doing this I was able to get a perfect blend on my green & Red, but it is the Blue that is the problem, and it is my PJ not the blender that is at fault here. The blender really made the green & red seamless, OH Joy!!!

3) Used the blender software to compensate for the difference in the blue output from the 2 PJ's


4) Adjusted the Gamma correctly in the xed.1, did not do this last night, Big necessity


5) Discovered that Blue Focus Tracking is IMPORTANT as Well!! Dooohh!!


6) Took some pictures


----------



## YONEXSP

Still to do


1) Astig on PJ#2 It sucks

2) Proper calibration of both PJ's

3) Mount the screen & PJ's properly on wall & ceiling


Run tests again


4) Negotiate price down to $1500 for the xed.1 I WANT ONE!!!!

5) Buy another XG110LC to go with the 1 I bought today

6) Sell the 2 Non LC XG's to pay for the one above

7) Lie to the wife about another PJ coming into the house

5) Setup a higher resolution to make a full 2.35:1 signal. Right now it is 2176x1024 or 2.125:1 So I need to create a custom resolution of 2406x1024 which with the 15% overlap is 2831x1024 or (1415x1024) times 2 - 15% overlap.


Run tests again! this is fun, but boy I need to get a life!!


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mp20748* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes, and also check to see how well it handels motion. Sharpness and the ability to handle motion is two very important things to look for once the signal is super processed and split, and then put back together on the screen.




Mike I checked per your suggestion. No motion problems at all. I do find the sharpness to be less than before but the screen is 30% bigger & the image is 50% than I used to run. This is only really noticable when comparing a DVD to a HD movie. The 5th Element 720p version looked sweet.


one thing that is kinda cool, is that even a DVD really starts to take on a Film look & Feel about it. It must be the size & aspect ratio. All in all, it is way to cool!!











Ken./


----------



## slartibartfasst

Ken, how many more blending solutions are you going to pull out of your hat? Seriously, I'm swamped following your efforts. Thanks.


----------



## YONEXSP

Until I can find one that works as good as the Zilla for under $1000


----------



## YONEXSP

though this xed.1 is coming mighty close. I'd still like to try it with a couple of Light Cannons to test the inbuilt overlap feature out the DVI Ports, as I don't have any moome cards installed in my PJ's


----------



## slartibartfasst

I have a Moome external here with your name on it, and some Extrons to drive the lines. That's one, who has another?


----------



## Mark_A_W

A LC Ken?


C'mon spill it! What type, what condition?


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Yonex,


can you please do a screenshot that shows a closeup of the are where the blend begins ?

I would like to see how good you managed to get small letters in the overlap zone, so something like the Fullscreen pattern from the Nokia Test or the Desktop would be cool.


I would suppose that there has to be some softening in the blend zone, but would like to get an idea how much.


Kudos to you for your continued efforts - this looks very promising










Oliver


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> A LC Ken?
> 
> 
> C'mon spill it! What type, what condition?



the 110 from Videogon, (Thx Sandy) Hopefully in pretty good shape, at least the tubes are in better shape than mine as you can tell from my screen shots lol!!!


K./


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Oliver Klohs* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yonex,
> 
> 
> can you please do a screenshot that shows a closeup of the are where the blend begins ?
> 
> I would like to see how good you managed to get small letters in the overlap zone, so something like the Fullscreen pattern from the Nokia Test or the Desktop would be cool.
> 
> 
> I would suppose that there has to be some softening in the blend zone, but would like to get an idea how much.
> 
> 
> Kudos to you for your continued efforts - this looks very promising
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oliver




Will do tonight


----------



## Mark_A_W

Congrats Ken.


Is the one on the left in the blend your primary XG (well, until the LC arrives..)? It's a bit hard to tell..


Are you running dual Moome cards? Or does the blend unit output Analog (DVI-I)?


Which solution has more control? This blending box or the VLC plugin?


I still think a "driver level" PC software solution is the holy grail for tight-arses (not hardware, and not a media player). Pity my room is only 3m wide....and I only have one XG LC...


Keep it up, you might earn yourself a steak dinner


----------



## Briands

Ken,


How does this box handle multiple inputs? Does it have memory slots to handle 60 and 72hz for instance? Or multiple input devices (from a switcher)?


----------



## YONEXSP

Good question, I don;t know I guess I should check the memory thingy. The specs are as foolows for refresh etc:


Max pixel rate 140 MHz (1024 x 768 @ 120 Hz, 1280 x 1024 @ 75 Hz)

Vertical Scan: 60 - 120 Hz

Horizontal scan: 15-110 KHz


So 72 hz is not a problem. But the unit has one memoryt slot from what I can see.


----------



## Oliver Klohs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Will do tonight



That's the spirit










I have a slow PC with a Radeon 9550 so for trying this out I'd need a new processor/mobo combo and a new graphics adapter I guess.


Marc W also sent me some settings to get Zoomplayer to run properly and we concluded that a 1700 Celeron does not cut it anymore, too bad.


Right now projector-wise I have a few options to try a stack, so I hope your pictures will encourage me










Oliver


----------



## Lewis837

Any chance you could post the users manual?


----------



## YONEXSP

All the documentation I have it at:

http://www.cyviz.com/xed1.htm 


Br Ken./


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Oliver Klohs* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> That's the spirit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a slow PC with a Radeon 9550 so for trying this out I'd need a new processor/mobo combo and a new graphics adapter I guess.
> 
> 
> Marc W also sent me some settings to get Zoomplayer to run properly and we concluded that a 1700 Celeron does not cut it anymore, too bad.
> 
> 
> Right now projector-wise I have a few options to try a stack, so I hope your pictures will encourage me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oliver




Here is the picture you requested, smack in the middle of the blend zone


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Here is the picture you requested, smack in the middle of the blend zone



Have you got a pic with all tubes converged, and more front on? It's still difficult to see how sharp the blendzone is from previous pic... maybe circle it for us


----------



## YONEXSP

will do, I'll take some tommorow, but basically that is a shot of the middle of the screen, not just the blend zone the blending is right where thext is on the right the far laft and right are non blended zones


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Ken,


thanks for that picture I am very impressed.

I can see a hint of fuzziness in some letters which is to be expected given that you are overlaying one green tube over the other, but the effect is so small that now I have to go and try this with two of my PG extras










Did you have two XG's with the more advanced point/zone convergence that does small/middle/big areas and did you use this feature a lot ?


Oliver


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Congrats Ken.
> 
> 
> Is the one on the left in the blend your primary XG (well, until the LC arrives..)? It's a bit hard to tell..
> 
> 
> Are you running dual Moome cards? Or does the blend unit output Analog (DVI-I)?
> 
> 
> Which solution has more control? This blending box or the VLC plugin?
> 
> 
> I still think a "driver level" PC software solution is the holy grail for tight-arses (not hardware, and not a media player). Pity my room is only 3m wide....and I only have one XG LC...
> 
> 
> Keep it up, you might earn yourself a steak dinner



!) the primary PJ is th eone of the right. But right now it is only sharper not better than the other coz the Astig is better. the other one has better tubes though.


2) No moome cards, all via VGA output from the xed.1


3) Looks like there maybe more options in the VLC Plugin, but the xed.1 software does realtime adjustments. But I don;t know if the OpenGL adjustments in the Plugin are all relevant for an external blender.


4) I agree, though I think with 2 external scalers you miht be able to use the xed.1 with any source


Can't wait for the LC to arrive, is it gonna blow my mind Mark?


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Oliver Klohs* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ken,
> 
> 
> thanks for that picture I am very impressed.
> 
> I can see a hint of fuzziness in some letters which is to be expected given that you are overlaying one green tube over the other, but the effect is so small that now I have to go and try this with two of my PG extras
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you have two XG's with the more advanced point/zone convergence that does small/middle/big areas and did you use this feature a lot ?



No point convergence used yet, just pysical setup side-by-side and a rough convergence using POSITION to move the image. The convergence can get a lot better, and if the ASTIG is done on the 2nd PJ, it will remove the fuzziness. That is what I achieved with a very piss-poor setup.


----------



## Oliver Klohs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> No point convergence used yet, just pysical setup side-by-side and a rough convergence using POSITION to move the image. The convergence can get a lot better, and if the ASTIG is done on the 2nd PJ, it will remove the fuzziness. That is what I achieved with a very piss-poor setup.



Man, you got me thinking right now









But where will I get a second 10PG with pristine tubes if it all works out ?


----------



## YONEXSP

sell it & buy 2 XG's/PG's. You don't need the 9" tubes with a blend


----------



## Oliver Klohs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> sell it & buy 2 XG's/PG's. You don't need the 9" tubes with a blend



Well,


I have thought about that, too but I like my 10PG so much, can't really imagine to part with it...

I did some preliminary testing tonight with two extras and it seems to be important to get some nicely matched units and it is also very important that they have similar drifting behaviour during warmup so that they do not make the overlap area fuzzy - not an easy thing to do.


And: Even with two (unmodded) PG extras the noise was much more than I could take - I guess we can never have it all


----------



## dokworm

Well hushboxes can fix the noise, and cooling mods stop the drift, so we can have it all - it just takes a lot of space and work


----------



## pkarmouche




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> cyviz is the company but the xed.1 is their older model that has been discontinued. It uses 2 VGA Inouts, as opposed to the new version which uses 1 input & 2 outout's all DVI



Ken,


THANK YOU for all your work. Great job, you da man!


So obviously even though the xed.1 has 2 in's and 2 out's you only need to use 1 in and the box splits and blends, right?


What are your thoughts on the newer DVI capable unit? I suppose if it is indeed DVI-D and it does the splitting/blending in the digital domain it eliminates a D/A conversion which might prove better quality/sharper.


Paul


----------



## pkarmouche




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> 3) Looks like there maybe more options in the VLC Plugin, but the xed.1 software does realtime adjustments. But I don;t know if the OpenGL adjustments in the Plugin are all relevant for an external blender.
> 
> 
> 4) I agree, though I think with 2 external scalers you miht be able to use the xed.1 with any source



Do I have this right?


VLC = free. But you can't use TheaterTek or WinDVD. PLUS: lots of controls (but not real time)


xed.1 = $2,500 (lower with possible group buy) But you can use any source that outputs (or can be converted to) VGA. PLUS: real time adjustments, easy set up.


What else?


Thanks again,


Paul


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pkarmouche* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Do I have this right?
> 
> 
> VLC = free. But you can't use TheaterTek or WinDVD. PLUS: lots of controls (but not real time)
> 
> 
> xed.1 = $2,500 (lower with possible group buy) But you can use any source that outputs (or can be converted to) VGA. PLUS: real time adjustments, easy set up.
> 
> 
> What else?
> 
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> 
> Paul



That about sums it up


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pkarmouche* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ken,
> 
> 
> THANK YOU for all your work. Great job, you da man!
> 
> 
> So obviously even though the xed.1 has 2 in's and 2 out's you only need to use 1 in and the box splits and blends, right?
> 
> 
> What are your thoughts on the newer DVI capable unit? I suppose if it is indeed DVI-D and it does the splitting/blending in the digital domain it eliminates a D/A conversion which might prove better quality/sharper.
> 
> 
> Paul



No you need to send it an already Split signal hence the use of HTPC video card. So if you use a dual head Vid Card or a couple of scalers, you can use it. The newer cyviz model also does the splliting, but it is $12k


----------



## Oliver Klohs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dokworm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Well hushboxes can fix the noise, and cooling mods stop the drift, so we can have it all - it just takes a lot of space and work



And better linearity than I got on my two Pg's on the first try.


With maximized phosphor usage the linearity on the two extras I use is a bit jumpy - you never notice it with one projector but it is VERY evident when trying to converge the outermost portion of the raster of projector 1 to projector 2.


If this area isn't almost perfect the picture goes from very crisp to fuzzy to crisp again - all in the screen middle where it hurts the most.


Maybe the XG's are really better suited to this endeavour....


----------



## Oliver Klohs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> No you need to send it an already Split signal hence the use of HTPC video card. So if you use a dual head Vid Card or a couple of scalers, you can use it. The newer cyviz model also does the splliting, but it is $12k



So I could for example use a scaler like the Lumagen and input its signal into an Extron switcher and then I go into the Cyviz with two outputs ?


Does not sound too hard to do and would allow us to watch everything out there.


----------



## plain fan

Is there a setting that allows the device to output negtive sync? Or does it perform its adjustments and output the sync sent to it? Interested in the box but since I've got a Barco I need to think about potential sync issues to fix.


----------



## YONEXSP

I'll check for you


----------



## YONEXSP

OK, I moved the Pj's & the screen to a better part of the basement. Lesson learnt, Plastic moving men you buy from Walmart are a great thing!


Also, it's easier with 2 to do a blend.


So what have I done tonight


1) Redid the G2 on PJ 1

2) Redid the Astig & focus on PJ 1 (it is sweet now)

3) Redid the convergence from scratch for both


Took some quick photos


Next


4) Redo the G2 on PJ 2 (about to start in 5 mins)

5) Redo white balnace on both

6) take some more pictures


The big difference I see left is the colour balance, the blending is fantastic, but the colour Difference between the 2 PJ's os Huge. I can not understate enough How important Coluor matching is to get a good seemless blend.


If not The blend take son a slight Rainbow type of effect, like a Mini Colour shift, with R,G,B in the middle. Faint, but there.


After I redo the colour I will post some more pictures.


K./


----------



## YONEXSP

OK, Much better now. Though I had to judge the colour calibration by eye, so not as good as it should be. But, it makes a hug difference when you get it closer.


So some screen shots after G2's , colour (rough cali)


All I can say is wow! is is very cool, and I would be extremely happy & content with the xed.1, it is very good.


Some screen shots from tonight.


----------



## YONEXSP

One more pic.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Ken,


those screenshots are your best yet, big improvements !

Now where do I get two XG LC's to do this










So is it possible to feed the same picture to both inputs of the blender or do you have to send one half to input 1 and the other half to input 2 ? Obviously the first option would be preferred with a scaler while the second one limits the blending to PC solutions if the price is to be kept in check. Do you already use all of the phosphor height of your XG's or are you using a more conservative throw as of now ?


And what kind of resolution is it you're using ?


Oliver


----------



## YONEXSP

1) Don't know if I had a splliter box I could try it.

2) Not all the phospher, as I have more wear on my greens than R or B. Plus I found that id you try to push to hard to the edges, you get little funky squiggles etc at the end of the lines. As we are trying to blend those araes, it's even more important that a Regular setup to have perfect edges. So I gave myself some spare room to make sure there were the least amount of issues possible.


For sure someone with more time than I had this weekend, and more patience, can absolutely max the Phosher usage. Also, it's best to have tubes on both that are evenly worn.


I am using 2256x1024 Not quite 2.35, but easier to setup on the PC. It is a 12% blend zone. I could use 10% or less even I was being conservative to start. A 2.35:1 would be


2406x1024 Or equivilant to a 156 Pixel blend zone or only 6%, it can be done, that was what I did 1st. Probably slightly tougher. This is more important in the overlap setup than the blending setup as well.


----------



## slartibartfasst

Kudos, Ken.


DSC2117 has some serious "pop." The separation between the foreground and the background is distinct yet natural; this separation and the obvious resolution of the background detail combines, in my eye, to give that much sought after "3-D" look. I'm sort of amazed that it came through in the picture.


DSC2119 is a perfect example of the sort of scene that would choke the nVidia solution that I'm using; there would be a visible brightness band in both the white and the blue areas, dead in the middle of the image. Can you see any flaws in the XED1 blend?


It looks like the advantages that the NEC AC XGs have over the AC Marquees just compound in a blending situation. I thought that sidestepping the bottleneck of vertical resolution as a function of phosphor height and dropping the refresh rate to 48hz would clear up any issues of image resolution at the screen. But it appears those color filtered and sharper HD-144s combined with the sharper P16 tubes really do give an edge to the final image on the screen. Congratulations, that is a mind-blowing image.


Are you seeing scan lines anywhere on the screen?


Oh, and how do I get my hands on one of these?


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *slartibartfasst* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Kudos, Ken.
> 
> 
> DSC2117 has some serious "pop." The separation between the foreground and the background is distinct yet natural; this separation and the obvious resolution of the background detail combines, in my eye, to give that much sought after "3-D" look. I'm sort of amazed that it came through in the picture.
> 
> 
> DSC2119 is a perfect example of the sort of scene that would choke the nVidia solution that I'm using; there would be a visible brightness band in both the white and the blue areas, dead in the middle of the image. Can you see any flaws in the XED1 blend?
> 
> 
> It looks like the advantages that the NEC AC XGs have over the AC Marquees just compound in a blending situation. I thought that sidestepping the bottleneck of vertical resolution as a function of phosphor height and dropping the refresh rate to 48hz would clear up any issues of image resolution at the screen. But it appears those color filtered and sharper HD-144s combined with the sharper P16 tubes really do give an edge to the final image on the screen. Congratulations, that is a mind-blowing image.
> 
> 
> Are you seeing scan lines anywhere on the screen?
> 
> 
> Oh, and how do I get my hands on one of these?



1) Flaws: I still have not done a good White Balance. In addition to get a better blend you need to use Bright Uniformity & White Uniformity. I can still see a slight yellow on one side of the blend caused by the Colour Mismath, as it was only done by eye. It is the most important thing I think to get a perfcet blend.


I tested this by blaniking one PJ, and it disappears so it is caused by the difference White Balance between the 2 PJ's.


2) I find that the blend zone is ever so slightly darker, hard to see but I have been looking for a week now, so I can see it if I look hard. I think I can cure this with good White Balnce, and playing with the color offsets in the Edgemaster tool. The tool has loads of seetings & I am just sliding things willy nilly to see what they do. I think with some proper experimentation a good FAQ could be written to make it easier for the next person.


3) The xed.1 it seems to be is obviously able to get 98% of the effcet from the Zilla at least from a PC. The extra 2% takes time & proper calibration via sensors etc I don't have here.


4) Another set of eyes to help would be nice, mine are going googly


5) Scanlines, I'll check, but it looks like it resolves the 1024 lines no problem

6) Availability: if a min of 10 people want oone, I think we can get it for about $2k + shipping etc with a powerbuy. Someone in the US is probably better to receive them to reduce Taxes etc if a PowerBuy is organised


----------



## YONEXSP

Feel free anyone ro suggest a Movie & scene you would liek to see. If I have it I will do the screenshot for you.


Ken./


----------



## Lewis837




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Oliver Klohs* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Ken,
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> So is it possible to feed the same picture to both inputs of the blender or do you have to send one half to input 1 and the other half to input 2 ? ......
> 
> 
> Oliver



From the "Edgemaster" quick guide .................

_In order to take advantage of the advanced algorithms of the xêd.1/xpo.2 you need a signal source capable of generating images with overlap. For a computer this means that the operating system needs to natively support overlap._


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 1) Flaws: I still have not done a good White Balance. In addition to get a better blend you need to use Bright Uniformity & White Uniformity. I can still see a slight yellow on one side of the blend caused by the Colour Mismath, as it was only done by eye. It is the most important thing I think to get a perfcet blend.
> 
> 
> I tested this by blaniking one PJ, and it disappears so it is caused by the difference White Balance between the 2 PJ's.



Agreed, in my BlendZilla setup, matched grey scales and colour balance are critical.... very very important.


----------



## Gino AUS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Feel free anyone ro suggest a Movie & scene you would liek to see. If I have it I will do the screenshot for you.
> 
> 
> Ken./



The Matrix when they are in the white construct.. this really tests the blend.


And how about any scene from the Incredibles or Finding Nemo, I'll try and duplicate your screenshots.


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Feel free anyone ro suggest a Movie & scene you would liek to see. If I have it I will do the screenshot for you.
> 
> 
> Ken./



Hi Ken,


I would like to see the white Pixar screen with the lamp that I showed in one of my screenshots earlier.


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## YONEXSP

Will do. I am in San Diego tonight, will be back home Wednesday Morning, so wednesday evening for the new screenshots.


K./


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gino AUS* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Agreed, in my BlendZilla setup, matched grey scales and colour balance are critical.... very very important.




Your Dead right Gino. Thi is what i am lacking right now, as i am trying to do everything by eye. Wish Ben was here with his Colour analyser!! Ben we need you


----------



## YONEXSP

New pictures upload in the other thread

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=715997


----------



## plain fan

Yonexsp have you had an opportunity to check the outputted sync, positive or negative? Thanks,

Grady


----------



## Chuchuf

Nice work Yonexsp.

But let me understand this.

1. You cannot simply output a scaler into this device, but have to input two, already split signals. NOT just two full frame signals, is that correct.

2. And did I read that THeatertek won't work with this solution?

3. If #1 is correct, how will you display anything that doesn't come from the HTPC?? ie HD sources.


Thanks,


Terry


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chuchuf* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nice work Yonexsp.
> 
> But let me understand this.
> 
> 1. You cannot simply output a scaler into this device, but have to input two, already split signals. NOT just two full frame signals, is that correct.
> 
> 2. And did I read that THeatertek won't work with this solution?
> 
> 3. If #1 is correct, how will you display anything that doesn't come from the HTPC?? ie HD sources.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Terry




Answer


1) Correct

2) Wrong, I am using TT2.2 with FFdshow & LimitedSharpen sweet!

3) BlackMagic Design DeckLink HD Capture card supports component & HD SDI $MSRP $995http:// www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hd/


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *plain fan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yonexsp have you had an opportunity to check the outputted sync, positive or negative? Thanks,
> 
> Grady



What ever you send it in sends out


----------



## YONEXSP

latest screen shot, same as in the other thread. As I said there, time to Piss or get off the pot. It's time to find out if anyone is interesetd in buying one.


----------



## Chuchuf

So, as I understand it, this will take a pretty good HTPC, plus the blender and an input card for HD. Total cost for the hardware about $4K plus cables. Not bad considering the alternatives if you are in the market for a very large 2.35 screen.


Terry


----------



## YONEXSP

My HTPC is a piece O'crap worth no more than $600 with the new Video Card, so I don't think you need spend that much. If you want the latest & greatest for games your figure is probably right, Ohhhh Imagine Half-Life 2 on this thing. I can,, I played it!!!


One word! Blimey! scared the crap out of me! 2.35:1 10ft screen was a bit'much for me lol!!!


----------



## MadMrH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MadMrH* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Im just waiting for my TWO BArco 1209s units I bought last week to arrive, then I intend to get back to blending and it looks like I will give the VLC software a go...............
> 
> 
> I like many others have spent WAY too long trying the nvidia system which could work but only if they update the drivers which they just dont seem to want to do.......



the two 1209s are here, and now both up and running.


I tried for the LAST TIME Nvidia - I cant add custom resolutions when in Horizontal span mode, I can add them in clone mode but cant them use them in H Span......


change the overlap and it changes the overall resolution..........


You end up in circles and my brain is fried!



SO Nvidia is even difficult to get just the overlap running correctly........



SO - VLC will be my next attempt. and soon.......


----------



## Gino AUS

Where did you disappear to Andy? I thought you got it working and were in blending nirvana, too busy to post anymore


----------



## dokworm

So is the blackmagic card confirmed to work with the setup?


----------



## MadMrH

HI GIno,


I do 70% of my work in the 5 months at this time of year.........


Once I found the 1209s pair I stopped work on what I was doing........


Very busy at the mo, but I will get this done now, New tubes are also on the way.........


Who knows maybe I will still end up with Blendzilla


(Just put that in to keep Tim awake!)


----------



## Luke212




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dokworm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So is the blackmagic card confirmed to work with the setup?



Im thinking of buying this card, DeckLink HD Studio , and writing software to blend it. the blackmagic cards support directshow.


This is looking to be my alternative to the price inhibitive blendzilla.


----------



## YONEXSP

Luke! that would be cool! That was the original intent to get a Developer to develop a DirectX Blender. Most are stuck using VLC, but it has no flexibility. A Native solution would be great. The overlap is taken care of by NVidia so just the blending required.


K./


----------



## Briands




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Luke212* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Im thinking of buying this card, DeckLink HD Studio , and writing software to blend it. the blackmagic cards support directshow.
> 
> 
> This is looking to be my alternative to the price inhibitive blendzilla.



I love how nonchalant this post sounds.


----------



## cocquebert

See also:

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/ 


Definitely low cost ... HD capture card


----------



## Briands




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Luke212* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Im thinking of buying this card, DeckLink HD Studio , and writing software to blend it. the blackmagic cards support directshow.
> 
> 
> This is looking to be my alternative to the price inhibitive blendzilla.



Just noticed that this card also has analog input (see the Connection Diagram ). This would really expand the usage of this solution. Of course and HD-SDI modded source would keep the signal digital until the output of the video card.


----------



## Briands




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cocquebert* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> See also:
> 
> http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/
> 
> 
> Definitely low cost ... HD capture card



I don't see reference to weather this HDMI capture handle protected content... I'm guessing not...unfortunately...


----------



## slartibartfasst

I also wonder if that HDMI input card is HDCP compliant, and if it has DirectShow filters/drivers. If so, at $250, this would appear to make the computer-based blending both cheap and easy. Assuming the input to the capture cards is 1080i60, though, I'm wondering how/where film source material could be deinterlaced. I suppose, if the input were 1080p24 or some multiple, this would be an afterthought, but I don't think any of the current players support p24 outputs.


If this does work, though, it cuts the cost proposition considerably. Which I think is important, because few want to pay the $16k for the BlendZilla, and there didn't seem to be a great deal of interest in Ken's $2k Cyviz box. At $250 for HDMI in vs $3000 for a HD-DVD/HD-SDI mod/Decklink Extreme combination the computer option is getting cheaper by the day.


..edit.. This could be a job for a HDCP scrubber, like the one Moome made. I think it was HDMI/HDCP in, DVI out. A DVI to HDCP cable, then, would leave the quality issue in the hands of the blending software and the DACs in the video card.


----------



## Sinobi




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> A Native solution would be great. The overlap is taken care of by NVidia so just the blending required.



If I'm not mistaken, blending has to be done AFTER the overlap and as NVidia is last in the chain, a DirectX plugin is before and thus has to do both the overlap AND the blend.


Henrik


----------



## YONEXSP

if that is the case, FFdshow would not work? No?


----------



## Sinobi

Are we talking decoder or quadro driver?

Of cause the decoder comes first (before Ffdshow), but I thought that the quadro driver came last in the chain....right?


Henrik


----------



## Luke212




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sinobi* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, blending has to be done AFTER the overlap and as NVidia is last in the chain, a DirectX plugin is before and thus has to do both the overlap AND the blend.
> 
> 
> Henrik



if the card supports directshow then overlap and blend are not really any great hurdle. The maths is logical and well documented.


Ill have a go with some SD content. if it works ok, then it should work with a HD directshow card, given a strong enough machine.


edit: Im going to call Blackmagic and see if they will send me a card.


----------



## welwynnick

These HDMI input cards are what everyone has been saying will not be readily available, at least for a long time. What has put me off PC blending slightly is the inability to use external HD video sources, but these cards appear to offer us some hope. Or have I missed something? An internal BD or HD DVD or HDD drive would still be part of the solution, but I think most would want to use external sources, too.


Hopeful Nick


----------



## Luke212

All the HDLink cards support DirectShow, and I have downloaded the Directshow SDK docs off their website that shows how to write code to interface with the cards. It looks interesting.


----------



## slartibartfasst

Hi Luke,


I didn't know that the HDMI card was part of the HDLink line. If you have an HD-SDI source and are serious about coding a blending function in DirectShow, I can send you a Decklink HD Extreme card. Blackmagic has a developer's mailing list, and an archive of said list on their site. There was a recent topic requesting the Blackmagic 5.7 drivers for the HDMI card, so I'm not sure if the drivers have been released yet - but, this makes sense, because the card hasn't been officially released yet.


Would you be able to write a DirectShow source filter for VLC? If so, and if the filter would interface with the HDMI card, I think it would be a major step forward and downward in price for the PC blending effort. Further, I think we're getting closer to the possibility of a cheap and dedicated PC-based blending "appliance" that will take an industry standard video input and drive two blended projectors.


I'll contribute what I can to your efforts, in terms equipment and in offsetting development costs.


----------



## Luke212




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *slartibartfasst* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi Luke,
> 
> 
> I didn't know that the HDMI card was part of the HDLink line. If you have an HD-SDI source and are serious about coding a blending function in DirectShow, I can send you a Decklink HD Extreme card. Blackmagic has a developer's mailing list, and an archive of said list on their site. There was a recent topic requesting the Blackmagic 5.7 drivers for the HDMI card, so I'm not sure if the drivers have been released yet - but, this makes sense, because the card hasn't been officially released yet.
> 
> 
> Would you be able to write a DirectShow source filter for VLC? If so, and if the filter would interface with the HDMI card, I think it would be a major step forward and downward in price for the PC blending effort. Further, I think we're getting closer to the possibility of a cheap and dedicated PC-based blending "appliance" that will take an industry standard video input and drive two blended projectors.
> 
> 
> I'll contribute what I can to your efforts, in terms equipment and in offsetting development costs.



1. I dont have an hd-sdi source, however I could use the analog HD input. If it uses the same interface i dont see this as a problem.


2. I havent seen VLC, but i would prefer to write a filter in my own player at first, and then maybe look at VLC.


----------



## YONEXSP

VLC won;t work as it is OpenGL


----------



## slartibartfasst

Luke: you have a PM.


Ken: If you take a look in the VLC options, the program has the ability to capture a video stream from a DirectShow source, though you're right, the processing in VLC uses OpenGL. I'm pretty sure that's how VLC was able to take video off of a IEEE1394/FireWire connection, back when people were (are) capturing/displaying transport streams from cable boxes before 5C flags came into effect. I also think people were using this functionality with early TV tuners (like the ATI All-in-Wonder cards) to view OTA stuff. But I'm probably wrong; I think M. Cocquebert or Luke would be better able to settle the issue.


Did you decide to keep the Cyvix Box? I'd imagine that a properly primed HDMI signal into the $250 Intensity card would provide a nice front-end to the nVidia overlap / Cyvix blend solution. All you would need is a simple full screen capture/display program, maybe with a good IVTC implementation in the mix somewhere, and you'd have yourself a pretty future-proof blend set-up. And about $13k in your pocket, compared to the other options out there.


I'm still kind of interested in the HD-SDI angle, but at $250 for the Decklink Intensity card versus $1500 for a one-trick HD-SDI modification and a $1000 Decklink Extreme card, I think most CRTers would opt for the former rather than the latter. Maybe as more people figure out how to slap a HD-SDI serializer onto that Broadcom chip the price will come down, but I don't know that the advantages of SDI outweigh the cost-benefit and convenience of HDMI. Also, I don't know how long that particular "loop-hole" will stay open, but HDMI seems to be around for at least the forseeable future.


----------



## Luke212

ok,


my thoughts:


My whole aim is to run HD-DVD on 2 blended projectors for awesome viewing pleasure.


It appears you can now install the toshiba drive into a PC, and watch HD-DVD using Win-DVD 8.


So If I were to write my own HD Player that supports blending, do I need to buy the PureVideoHD codecs off NVidia for many $$ and incorporate them?


----------



## YONEXSP

love to get a copy of Win-DVD 8, but I understand it is only the Japanese version that supports HD DVD


----------



## Sinobi

The Japanese WinDVD site states:

"HDCP（High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection）

COPP（Certified Output Protection Protocol）"


Just guessing, but doesn't that indicate a problem for us CRT owners?


Henrik


----------



## Luke212




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sinobi* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Japanese WinDVD site states:
> 
> "HDCP（High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection）
> 
> COPP（Certified Output Protection Protocol）"
> 
> 
> Just guessing, but doesn't that indicate a problem for us CRT owners?
> 
> 
> Henrik



you need a HDCP compliant DVI(or HDMI)-RGBHV Converter.


----------



## Luke212

I was working on the DirectShow Blender last night. Its a bit harder to setup because Microsoft has dropped DirectShow from the DirectX Platform.


The next gen video system is based off Media Foundation which will be used in Vista.


NOTE: ill start another thread for my development!


----------



## Luke212

i started a thread with screenshots here

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=733132


----------



## Briands

YONEXSP... where have you ended up on the blending quest?


----------



## YONEXSP

I finished my efforts. The only thing I was going to try next was a GIF overlay or something with FFDshow. But due to the lack of interest on the forum I went back to my real life










I found, everyone is interested as long as the solution is free. To be fair the VLC solution is really good, but your stuck with VLC and it's playback for everything.


K./


----------



## Clarence




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Pauls paper makes a great Requirement Specification to start with
> 
> http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/colour/edgeblend/



Did anyone save a local copy of this great blending info. The link is dead now.


----------



## v1rtu0s1ty




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *YONEXSP* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I finished my efforts. The only thing I was going to try next was a GIF overlay or something with FFDshow. But due to the lack of interest on the forum I went back to my real life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I found, everyone is interested as long as the solution is free. To be fair the VLC solution is really good, but your stuck with VLC and it's playback for everything.
> 
> 
> K./



quick question though for the VLC stuff. Using vlc's wall feature(not blending but just simple splitting) on single monitor, the splitted image is really good as if it appears as one image. So now, since I don't have a projector, when vlc is used with the 2 projectors, how would the stitching in the middle look like as compared to the 15% blending?


Clarence/Cliff,


You might want to try "Take me back" feature from archive.org









Unfortunately, that website if blocked from where I'm working right now. I can access is at home and do use it regularly.


----------



## Clarence




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *v1rtu0s1ty* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> (not blending but just simple splitting)...
> 
> ...the splitted image is really good as if it appears as one image. So now, since I don't have a projector, when vlc is used with the 2 projectors, how would the stitching in the middle look like as compared to the 15% blending?



Trying to merge 2 split images without a blend will be about as effective as trying to push two sheets of drywall close together... no matter how you try, you won't be able to hide the seam without tape and mud.


Thanks for the archive.org suggestion, but I get _"R o b o t f i l t e r

Sorry, some robots are filtered from this site....

This filtering is not intended to restrict your enjoyment of this site. There is a very large amount of data contained within and robots who attempt to copy the whole site adversely affect our bandwidth and wallet."_


but I googled +pbourke +edgeblend and found it on another site:
http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourk...our/edgeblend/


----------



## YONEXSP




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Clarence* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Did anyone save a local copy of this great blending info. The link is dead now.




I have his email address somewhere if you want it? He can probably email you a copy I'm sure


----------



## v1rtu0s1ty




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Luke212* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> i started a thread with screenshots here
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=733132



I saw your screenshots and they're very cool. However, I didn't see any link to tools/filters/apps needed to the blending. Can you please post it?


----------



## linen351

I have read this thread with great interest, as I'm trying to use three projectors left from my company's former driving simulator to make a video wall roughtly 7x2 meters (22' x 6.5') size (just for the fun of it).


Now I can't seem to get the settings in Panoramix right. It seems the size generated video output windows is related to the size of my input. This means that if I for example input a 4:3 narrow photo I get three windows with a ratio of roughly 1.33:3 (4:9). This is strange, the expected behaviour in this case would be that the photo fills the center projector, faded in the edges, and that I would get just a little of the image on the side projectors.


What is the right way to set this up? I want to have the projectors permanently fixed to give me a 10:3 ratio, and the result of showing more narrow content should be black borders on the sides.


I'm happy for any help I can get!

//Swedish newbie


----------



## plain fan

Driving simulator?


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *linen351* /forum/post/17563913
> 
> 
> Now I can't seem to get the settings in Panoramix right. It seems the size generated video output windows is related to the size of my input. This means that if I for example input a 4:3 narrow photo I get three windows with a ratio of roughly 1.33:3 (4:9). This is strange, the expected behaviour in this case would be that the photo fills the center projector, faded in the edges, and that I would get just a little of the image on the side projectors.



I've been blending with VLC for years (literally), but I don't know of anyone who's used more than two projectors in this configuration so you might be the first to try with three!


First of all, which VLC version are you using? The new VLC versions have a bug with the panoramix plugin, so there are only certain versions (taken from previous svn builds) that actually work. I filed a bug report on Trac a long time ago, but unfortunately the author of the panoramix plugin is no longer actively supporting this as he's moved on to other things, so it's not been looked at.

The output ratio is also dependent on the resolution each of your video outputs is set to - what resolution are you using?


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## linen351

By Driving Simulator I mean a big screen car and truck driving experience simulator... we were testing for example how drivers are reacting to tiredness and so on.


I'm using VLC 1.01 on PC for my tests. It has a bug which make the Windows not render at first, but I have found out that if I right-click in the taskbar, select maximize, double click on the window, then I can see all windows. Is there any further bugs?


The target projectors are Nec LT245:s, in 1024x768 (yes DLP not CRT, but I want to give it a try). But I would prefer if I could test this on another machine without having to set the entire rig up first.


At first I thought that VLC was reading my monitor resolution to set the aspect ratio, but that does not seem to be the case. Then I thought the crop settings were important. And they seem to be, but I can't figure out how they are related to what I get.


Essentially if I put 3 1024 by each other with 10% overlap I should get 1024*3 - 1024*0.1*(3-1) = 3676.8, that is 3677x768 in resolution. But how to set this up?


I'll sure upload some pictures if I can get this to work


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *linen351* /forum/post/17569572
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using VLC 1.01 on PC for my tests. It has a bug which make the Windows not render at first, but I have found out that if I right-click in the taskbar, select maximize, double click on the window, then I can see all windows. Is there any further bugs?



Interesting, the last version I tested was something like 1.0, and that version had a bug that meant that with panoramix enabled no video actually displayed except for a few frames every few seconds. It seems to be working better in 1.0.3 that I have just downloaded! However, it still seems to be broken compared to the 0.9.0 SVN version from August 2008 that I have been using for the last year or so.


I had some success just now with this 1.0.3 version, but the crop module seems to have a problem with some material depending on the source aspect ratio. So sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

What you need to try though (this is the same for the 0.9.0 version that I use) is in the Video settings, you need to define the video height and width, as well as the x and y position, it doesn't work if you let it auto-detect. My width is 1024, height is 768 i.e the resolution of my projectors. set the x and y position both to 1.

With these set you should find that the two images (or three in your case) go to the correct monitors, and go full-screen properly assuming you have full-screen selected.


You will find that the blend parameters in panoramix need adjusting to get a seamless blend, but you'll need to get your resolution and alignment correctly before fine tuning that. My panoramix parameters are:


# integer (Attenuation, begin (in %))

#panoramix-bz-begin=0


# integer (Attenuation, middle (in %))

panoramix-bz-middle=15


# integer (Attenuation, end (in %))

panoramix-bz-end=70


Also the crop ratio parameter needs to be adjusted for the ratio of your screen, i.e. mine is 2350 for a 2.35:1 ratio screen. The auto-crop setting is also far too sensitive on its default settings, mine are currently set as follows:


# integer (Number of images for change)

autocrop-time=200


# integer (Number of lines for change)

autocrop-diff=16


# integer (Number of non black pixels )

autocrop-non-black-pixels=0


# integer (Skip percentage (%))

autocrop-skip-percent=0


# integer (Luminance threshold )

autocrop-luminance-threshold=25



I'll be sticking with the 0.9.0 version though for now, as there is still definately something wrong with the latest version with some video files.

Thanks,

Ben


----------



## linen351

Ok, setting the video height, width, x and y makes VLC crash... I guess I should try installing 0.9.0, but I couldn't find an installer so it might take some time.


About the crop filter, should I tick that in the list where filters are activated? Or does the Panoramix filter take care of this for me?


Thanks' for your extensive help!


----------



## benwillcox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *linen351* /forum/post/17585512
> 
> 
> Ok, setting the video height, width, x and y makes VLC crash... I guess I should try installing 0.9.0, but I couldn't find an installer so it might take some time.
> 
> 
> About the crop filter, should I tick that in the list where filters are activated? Or does the Panoramix filter take care of this for me?
> 
> 
> Thanks' for your extensive help!



Its a specific build of 0.9.0 that works best, what I will do later is package it up and make it available for download, so I'll post a link later.

Sometimes VLC is temperamental about its settings, if you find its crashing it can be best to delete your vlcrc and start again with a clean setup.


Yes in the filters you will see all the filter modules listed twice. You need to tick them from the second set of filters, and its important that they are ticked in the right order, as this builds the filter order string at the bottom of that config box. I can't remember which to tick first, but work down the list and tick whichever one come first, then the one further down, so you will need both crop and panoramix selected.


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## benwillcox

Here's a link to the VLC version I use which works with blending:

http://www.willcoxonline.com/cinema/vlc-0.9.0.zip 


I've also included my vlcrc file which you can put in the relevant place to try out my settings.


Let me know if you need any more assistance,


Ben


----------



## PeriSoft




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *linen351* /forum/post/17569572
> 
> 
> By Driving Simulator I mean a big screen car and truck driving experience simulator... we were testing for example how drivers are reacting to tiredness and so on.



If you ever need another one, you know where to find me .


----------



## linen351

benwillcox:

I tried the version of VLC you sent, but I can't seem to get the filters active. In subsequent versions of VLC there are two different lists of filters under Video->Filter where one had to tick them in the second list, here there is only one list. What am I missing?


PeriSoft:

Cool! Our simulator was never that elaborate when it comes to moving and stuff. I would really like to try it in real life some day, I guess it will eventually find its way to Sweden. The simulator we built was more room size, designed to be extended with various stuff. And we had a "getting sick rate" of about 10% compared to your 1%


----------



## MikeEby

I just wanted to make sure you guys were aware of this thread.

http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18404 


This solution looks very promising. The MPC-HC solution seems very stable to me, I just don't have two projectors to play around with.





















Mike


----------



## Sinobi




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benwillcox* /forum/post/17573305
> 
> 
> Interesting, the last version I tested was something like 1.0, and that version had a bug that meant that with panoramix enabled no video actually displayed except for a few frames every few seconds. It seems to be working better in 1.0.3 that I have just downloaded! However, it still seems to be broken compared to the 0.9.0 SVN version from August 2008 that I have been using for the last year or so.
> 
> 
> I had some success just now with this 1.0.3 version, but the crop module seems to have a problem with some material depending on the source aspect ratio. So sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
> 
> -
> 
> -
> 
> -
> 
> I'll be sticking with the 0.9.0 version though for now, as there is still definately something wrong with the latest version with some video files.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ben



Actually I have just been playing around with the latest VLC version (1.05) and it seems to work properly now.

Finally, after using a crippled for years now, we now have a version that works.

Hopefully someone will make the advanced functions of the blendzone work in the panoramix module, so we can have a perfect blend.

EDIT: The automatic cropping function does not work in 1.05. Upon a new aspect ratio detection the program exits. If you instead set aspect ratio manually in the crop module, it works fine.


Regards

Henrik


----------



## Sisyphus

Another blending solution. Dual channel hardware edge blending for $1900. DVI input and output.


Mviewtech MP102-DVI

http://www.mviewtech.com/en/product....assid=74&id=97 

http://www.dhgate.com/p_ff808081289b...1144158.html#0 

http://www.mviewtech.com/en/faq.asp?video2


----------



## MadMrH

Hi,


I contacted Mviewtech.com


here are a couple of links about the product


"The video demo at http://v.ku6.com/show/wSmElYAISRMsnsJZ.html 


And I place some picture at http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=18394 "


video above is office testing on wall - looks "ok"


pictures in the forum link show FULL red / green / blue , and the images appear to have no "stepping" within the blend zone.


The unit is NOT HDCP compliant and so designed for PC games.


I downloaded the manual for the 2 ch unit (they also have a 3ch version)

blend zone from 0 to 512 pixels, very basic single page for setup, so easy to use - I dont know what it actually looks like in real life!


At its current price I will not be getting one in for testing.


(Does anyone know an available HDCP removal







device ??? - PM ME)


PS - I need to find some time and find/check an old PC hard drive, when I started blending I listed every possible option available and those not yet on market with as much detail as I could find, I would like to find that document and post for all, a sort of history of blending.


Andy.


----------



## atlemusic

Hi!


A fast question, if i use a videocard with two DVI out and put the Media Player Classic to Fullscreen. Can i use it to blend two CRT projectors with Moome?


----------



## nashou66

Yes you can. I use the Tv-One units.


Athanasios


----------



## dvh99

does he not need a shader plugin for the luminance roll off?


----------



## atlemusic

shader plugin? hmm sounds like a good feature!


----------

