# HD144 lens on any machine that uses HD8's.....



## Chuchuf

Ya'll probably know of the advantages of using the HD144 or 145 color corrected/color filtered lens on the Barco 808 projectors from some of the work that was pionieered on this forum a few months ago. A nice design was come up with for the Barco 808S that allowed you to attach the HD144 lens's. The only problem with the design we could see was that you lost the schiemflug control. Other than that the idea of using these lenses had a LOT of merrit because it allowed the colors to be corrected to their proper primaries.

Yes, work was done in adding tint to the glycol and roscoe filters to these machines but both of these methods had disadvantages to the use of the Hd144 or HD145 lens system. After all, the NEC XG1350 is considered to have some of the best colors in the industry and the main reason is the Hd144 lens assy.


Well, a friend of mine followed that thread carefully and was determined he could build a better mouse trap. He just didn't want to loose the Scheimflug adjustment. He came to me and "borrowed" (although I doubt I'll ever see them again,,,,lol) a set of HD144's a few weeks ago. Yesterday, I got to see his handy work and must say that I am very impressed with his design. Not only did he get the HD144's on on his BG808S projector, BUT the schiemflug adjustment is still completely operational AND here is the best part, the design he came up with can be used on ANY projector that uses HD8 lens's. So now any Barco, Marquee, Ampro and other PJ owners could have the advantages of having a higher quality color corrected/color filtered optic system on their CRT as this design isn't limited to the BG808.


He doesn't post at all but does read the forum a bit. I told him yesterday that I would start this thread for him to let ya'll know what he has accomplished. At this point I don't know if he intends to make his design available or is going to sell the parts as a kit to those interested. I guess a lot has to do if there is any interest in this sort of thing.


Quite impressive indeed.


Terry


----------



## Vibe

Count me as one who would be interested for my 808.


----------



## Javers

Sounds cool, i presume these adapters are some sort of plate that screws into the exisiting mounts and the the hd144 / 145's screw into the plate?


If I can source some lenses here in the UK i'd be interested in a set for my BG808s.


----------



## tubesguy

Interested! I've got a 1208s/2 and the HD144s, and I'm set to go. - Pat


----------



## Chuchuf

Pat, save your lens's. What is nice about his design is that it can be installed by anyone with common tools.

Javers, yes the existing lens holds and screws are used.


Terry


----------



## tubesguy

Terry -


You've seen me around a hammer and a saw. Do you really have confidence in my abilities?







- Pat


----------



## Person99

1208/2 -- interested.


----------



## secstate

Yep I would be interested do though the throw distance is still different correct? That is the only thing that would slow me down. I hate the idea of remouting my projector.....


----------



## cmjohnson

I'd take that one step further.


If I had just ONE HD-144 or 145 lens base, I could easily design and fabricate

a prototype mounting plate for Marquees that will replace the existing HD-8 mounting plate, and preserve Scheimpflug functionality.


I don't say I'd PRODUCE them in quantities for others, because my milling

machine is a manual one and it'd be too time consuming for me to scratch

build them. but I could provide interested parties with all the necessary data that would allow them to have any local machine shop cut out a set.


Another possibility would be to simply modify the existing lens mounting plate so that either HD-s or 144/145s could be mounted on the same plate.


If anyone would be interested in helping me with this simple project and has

at least a mounting flange assembly for a 144 or 145 that they would loan me for evaluation, it'd be good.


CJ


----------



## gn2

I'd be interested in a kit to convert my Marquee, I'm so sick of the orange reds...


And CJ, if you want a mount plate for an HD144/145 lens, just email me, I've got some mount plates for an NEC just lying around, you are welcome to one.


----------



## Chuchuf

CJ,

I'd say that if you did some research on what has been done in this area you would find that "fabricating a prototype mounting plate that will replace the existing HD-8 plate, and preserve Scheimpflug functionality" is not as easy as you might think. Again, I suggest you go back and read what is already done and you will understand the problems.

This solution is much more elegant than anything suggested to date.

If you want to see what the mounting distances are, go back and read Bjorne 's thread as I am told he was righ on with his calculations.


Pat, yes you could put these on without difficulty because they DON'T require a hamer or saw......lol


Terry


----------



## cmjohnson

I'd need to see at least a mounting plate for a 144, and one may be on the way to me to take a look at.


At least a picture of an installed 144 on its plate would be helpful, too.


I envision a semi-universal mounting plate, with hole patterns drilled and

tapped for more than one lens type, but until I actually see some of the 144

hardware, I can't be sure it'll work.


Maybe it'll work, maybe not. I'm willing to find out.


CJ


----------



## bchamber

Having just installed Bjorn's lens adapter this past weekend, I am somewhat surprised an adapter could be made to work between the factory plate and the HD144 lens. I anxious to hear how this turns out. I can comment on the end results. This is the best my PJ has ever looked. The colors are much improved. I watched CSI Miami on Monday nights and it was indeed impressive. I also want to mention the mounting distance issue. Before the change my PJ was a full 9 inches closer than the LENS program recommended. After the change, I am still happy with the raster coverage. Down the road I might go to a bigger screen (currently 96 inches wide) but for now I am a happy camper. Good luck with all of this!


----------



## cmjohnson

Can someone provide me with a clear picture of the mounting side of a 144?


It will help me to understand the presumed difficulty.


CJ


----------



## B.Hegelstad




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by cmjohnson_
> *Can someone provide me with a clear picture of the mounting side of a 144?
> 
> 
> It will help me to understand the presumed difficulty.
> 
> 
> CJ*



All the pictures you need is on my Web Page , but this was the first i tried to and it's not possible without modifying the the HD-144 lenses to.


The HD-144 lens brackets are wider than the original adapter that the HD-8 lens slides in to so there is no way you'll get it close enough to the tube face without removing the original adapter.


----------



## Chuchuf

Bjorne,

My hat goes off to you and the work you did on your adapter plates to mount the HD144/145 lens assy to the Barco. Your measurement coincide exactly with what my friend did.

He to is a very exacting machinist who has full machining capabilities in his home/shop. What I first pointed out your thread to him, he was impressed but convinced that there was another way to do this that would allow for the scheimflug adjustment to remain functional on his Barco 808S. He got some lens's from me and told me to come by and see what he did. I tried to imagine it but just couldn't see where he was going.

He now has all three lens's mounted with his prototypes and they seem to function beautifully. I am having him build a set for me for a BG808S with new MEC tubes that I am going to sell. We also put a set of ew MEC tubes in his and hung it today. Is going to be quite a PJ when completed.

What I like about his design is that is can be used on any CRT that uses HD8 lens's and is easy to install. That would include the BG801, 800, Marquee 8000, 8500 series as well as all the Barco 808series.

I will let him come in and describe his design if he wants to devilge that.

He did tell me today that if there were at least 10 folks interested in this he would go to a fab shop and have them turn out the units. I don't know what his pricing will be but I would guess somewhere around what Bjorn's adapters were.

email me at [email protected] if interested and I will pass it on to him.


Terry


----------



## B.Hegelstad




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *Bjorne,
> 
> My hat goes off to you and the work you did on your adapter plates to mount the HD144/145 lens assy to the Barco. Your measurement coincide exactly with what my friend did.
> 
> He to is a very exacting machinist who has full machining capabilities in his home/shop. What I first pointed out your thread to him, he was impressed but convinced that there was another way to do this that would allow for the scheimflug adjustment to remain functional on his Barco 808S. He got some lens's from me and told me to come by and see what he did. I tried to imagine it but just couldn't see where he was going.
> 
> He now has all three lens's mounted with his prototypes and they seem to function beautifully. I am having him build a set for me for a BG808S with new MEC tubes that I am going to sell. We also put a set of ew MEC tubes in his and hung it today. Is going to be quite a PJ when completed.
> 
> What I like about his design is that is can be used on any CRT that uses HD8 lens's and is easy to install. That would include the BG801, 800, Marquee 8000, 8500 series as well as all the Barco 808series.
> 
> I will let him come in and describe his design if he wants to devilge that.
> 
> He did tell me today that if there were at least 10 folks interested in this he would go to a fab shop and have them turn out the units. I don't know what his pricing will be but I would guess somewhere around what Bjorn's adapters were.
> 
> email me at [email protected] if interested and I will pass it on to him.
> 
> 
> Terry*



Terry


I did this project for everyone and i found out that if i made it with scheimpflug it would be much more expensive and not interesting for most guys.

Here in Norway everything is expensive and machining the adapters with scheimpflug would be around $900.00 USD and plus freight and bolt sets it would just be to expensive.

So i got a deal with a friend making them without the scheimpflug for much less, and leaving some work to me to so i could keep the price low.

I priced them very low and didn't make make a lot of money on them.


If i had one 808s myself that i where using and not the 1209s maybe i had gone further with sheimpflug and everything.


All the 808s i have mounted with HD-144 lenses has perfect sharpness all over the picture and do not need the scheimpflug, they are all mounted perfect with 2 meter wide screens and that seems to be the default on the 808s.


I think it's nice that someone takes it further, this is really an big upgrade for the 808s and will be on others to that uses HD-8 lenses.

Just hope someone can find more HD-144 lenses because that have been a big problem lately, i wonder why


----------



## Chuchuf

Bjorn,

Like I said, our complements to you and all the pioneering work you have done here. I gave up on Roscoe filter paper after doing one because of the loss of focus and although I liked the idea of colored glycol, I wasn't convinced that was the correct approach either. This just took it to another level that you may have already thought about.

It's a different approach that should not drive the cost up from what you did. I'm sure looking at your adapters there wasn't much left at the end for you.

But like you said, it's the idea of getting read red and true green primaries like the NEC XG's that makes this a worthwhile project. That was really what we were all about on this. Improving on the Barco and Marquee CRT's to put their colors in the class of an NEC.


Terry


----------



## holisten

If any of you are interested - I have a minty set of hd-144 lenses for sale!


Greeting from Denmark

Henrik


----------



## gn2

Only problem with that is shipping to NA would cost more than the lenses are worth....


----------



## Chuchuf

If anyone does locate a hord of these lens's let me know. I need a few sets.


Terry


----------



## onlink

1208/2


would be interested but I am thinking 144s are hard to come by. What is general availability and a reasonable ballpark cost for these?


----------



## koldby

gn2


If you send by air - yes. But if you send it surface it is not that expensive. I know - I bought my HD144 in LA - USA and had them sent... And I am from Denmark..


Koldby


----------



## cmjohnson

FYI, there are some sets on ebay right now.


Go to the tacked topic "Hi-Rez projections is cleaning their warehouse!"

at the top of the CRT forum and follow the links.


A couple of sets are up right now.


CJ


----------



## armstrr

any idea how this modification would affect throw distance, terry?


----------



## Tom.W

About a foot shorter.


----------



## secstate




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by cmjohnson_
> *FYI, there are some sets on ebay right now.
> 
> 
> Go to the tacked topic "Hi-Rez projections is cleaning their warehouse!"
> 
> at the top of the CRT forum and follow the links.
> 
> 
> A couple of sets are up right now.
> 
> 
> CJ*



I might be missing them, but all the ones that I saw from that seller were HD145 color CORRECTED NOT color FILTERED.


----------



## cmjohnson

It's there on the second page.

http://cgi.e-b-a-y.-c-o-m/ws/eBayISA...745998217&rd=1 



CJ


----------



## armstrr

out of curiousity, what is the difference between 145n's and 144's. from the reading i've done i think they are both colour corrected AND colour filtered. so where is the diff's???


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Only thing i know of is the difference in throw rate and the 5 instead of 4


----------



## armstrr

thanks for the reply. Any idea how much different the throw is?


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Sorry don't know!


----------



## BullFire

Chuchuf do you have pictures of these lens adapters your friend have made? I'm waiting for my set of hd144 lenses coming from US next week. But I have not ordered adapters yet.


----------



## Javers




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by BullFire_
> *Chuchuf do you have pictures of these lens adapters your friend have made? I'm waiting for my set of hd144 lenses coming from US next week. But I have not ordered adapters yet.*



Ditto, mine are also on their way over. Terry do you have any indications yet as to how long it will be before these adapters become available and at what cost?


Jon


----------



## Chuchuf

Guys,


The final design was finished up yesterday and the adapters will be made out of aluminum. The prototypes were made out of plastic but those had a tendency to change with temp and humidity changes. This can change the fit of the adapters slightly which in turn makes them looser than you want for doing focus adjustments of the lens's.

So it looks like the best way to accomidate these adapters is for you to send us your HD144 lens's for us to put the adapters on them. The reason is the adapters will be heated to get them on the HD144's tightly when they cool so they can't move. We have also found a slight variation in the sizes of the HD144's and HD145's. This presents a challange to the folks overseas who have expressed an interest in this project.

The first three sets will be made the end of this week which I get one set for a customers 808S I am building.

Yesterday, I did final color calibration to the test BG808S we built with new MEC tubes and all the primary colors were spot on. The focus was very sharp (unlike using roscoe filter paper) and the overall colors were very NEC like. We watched a bit of Spyderman2 and the Fifth Element on DVD and then some HD content from Voom.


Terry


----------



## kjelli

So on a really hot summer day I should stay clear the PJ. As the lenses might fall out?


Sorry, couldn't help myself.


Kjell


----------



## Chuchuf

lol

It would have to be a REALLY hot day.....


Terry


----------



## Larry Fine

As the newly-late Johnny Carson used to say:


"It was really hot today!"


----------



## Javers

Damn, my lenses have just been shipped from US to the UK yesturday







. Oh well, Terry how hard is the process of attaching the plates to the lenses? is there any chance of a diy version?


Jon


----------



## Chuchuf

OK guys, here is the deal.

Next week my friend who developed this is building 3 sets of these. Ther are going to be made out of aluminum and he will have to add the adapters to the HD144's or 145's himself. I'm sure it could be done in the field but being a perfectionist, he wants to make sure they are done perfectly. The adapters are rings that are perfectly machined to fit on to your HD144's allowing them to be put on to the rear section of the HD8 which bolt to your Barco or Marquee projector. The initial prototypes were made out of some kind of a plastic that had slight expansion and contraction propertied that caused it to slip slightly if the ring expanded and you were doing optical focus. With the aluminum these are being built out of, he will machine them a few thousands small, heat the rings up and add them to the HD144 lens's and they will not be able to move once installed. Once again, you will maintain Scheinflug adjustment.

Our experience with testing the prototypes is that you get a slightly better focus and the R, and G primary colors are absolutely accurate, something the Barco's and Marquee's with non color filtered lens's really lack.

One set is already sold to an 808S that I am building for one of my customers. The other two are available for $300 plus shipping.

I know that a number of you have emailed me in the past about these, but if you are interested in getting one of these three sets, email me again at [email protected] 

I don't have any pictures from him yet but will post them after he build's the final version next week.


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

OK guys, here is the deal.

Next week my friend who developed this is building 3 sets of these. Ther are going to be made out of aluminum and he will have to add the adapters to the HD144's or 145's himself. I'm sure it could be done in the field but being a perfectionist, he wants to make sure they are done perfectly. The adapters are rings that are perfectly machined to fit on to your HD144's allowing them to be put on to the rear section of the HD8 which bolt to your Barco or Marquee projector. The initial prototypes were made out of some kind of a plastic that had slight expansion and contraction propertied that caused it to slip slightly if the ring expanded and you were doing optical focus. With the aluminum these are being built out of, he will machine them a few thousands small, heat the rings up and add them to the HD144 lens's and they will not be able to move once installed. Once again, you will maintain Scheinflug adjustment.

Our experience with testing the prototypes is that you get a slightly better focus and the R, and G primary colors are absolutely accurate, something the Barco's and Marquee's with non color filtered lens's really lack.

One set is already sold to an 808S that I am building for one of my customers. The other two are available for $300 plus shipping.

I know that a number of you have emailed me in the past about these, but if you are interested in getting one of these three sets, email me again at [email protected] 

I don't have any pictures from him yet but will post them after he build's the final version next week.


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

Some pictures


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

and more


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

Unfortunately the better pictures file sizes are to large to post on VS and I don't know another way to do it.

These will give you the general idea. These are a set of HD144's on a Barco 808S. THe final adapter ring is made out of aluminium and the rear sleave is now meing bade out of plastic. This will work with HD144 and 145 lens's.


Terry


----------



## Mr Postman

Hi Terry


What is the actual difference between the 144 and 145 lens's, assuming both color corrected and filtered?



Fred.


----------



## draganm

Terry it looks like he is making simple spacers rings, which press onto the lense and then screw onto the HD8 mounting plate, right? I'm sure the tolerances are tight but the design is quite starightforward. Can you give us an exact throw distance calculation with a set of these installed on a machine that originally used HD8s?


----------



## Chuchuf

Fred,


We don't know the actual difference in the lens's but have tested both in an 808S w/ MEC tubes. Throw distance is the same. Galen seems to think that there is a bit more apiture in the 145's.


They are spacer rings that are heated on for a tight fit. They cannot be allowed to rotate. This is why he scrapped the original idea of using a plastic material for there. There was to much expansion and contraction.

You cannot see the details in the rings from the photo's, but I can tell you they take about 6 hrs for him to make and assemble a set lens's. The machine work is very high tollerence (.oox's).


This afternoon I am setting up another 808S in my shop on an 80" W screen with new MEC tubes and a set of these modded HD144's. From that I should be able to come up with a multiplier that you can use with screen width. Barco lens says the throw distance should be 115.1" to the front of the first mounting tab. With the HD8's that are on the stock PJ and the H Width maxed oyt at 1024 x 768 60 hz the actual measured distance is 113.5"


Terry


----------



## cmjohnson

I'd just like to mention that as I was looking through my Marquee manual,

I noticed that HD145s are an available optional lens for Marquees.


This makes it pretty obvious that there's an HD145 adapter plate available

from VDC. Assuming they're still in production.


As a result, I've abandoned the idea of making my own HD145 to Marquee

adapters. It wouldn't be possible to modify the standard Marquee plate

for them anyway. You'd have to start over and make a new one.


CJ


----------



## Chuchuf

That's what Bjorne did.


Terry


----------



## Mr Postman

Thanks Terry.



The cine8 HD8 are listed as 10lp/mm and color filtered and corrected, and if the 808s's HD8 lens's are inferior to those, why not use the "newer" HD8 used for the Cine8?

I also found that the Cine7 uses HD145N lens's but they're listed as 8lp/mm, so if the HD145N only has 8lp/mm wouldn't they be inferior to even the HD8 on the 808s in this regard?


How many lp/mm are the HD144 able to resolve?



Fred.


----------



## pcCinema

"The cine8 HD8 are listed as 10lp/mm HD145N only has 8lp/mm"


Uh huh... Told you so...


You may be perceiving an increase in sharpness due to filtering that really isn't there.


Troy


----------



## Mr Postman

Yes,

so if the HD144 doesn't have 10lp/mm then I don't understand why upgrade to less, other than getting colorfiltered lens's? Or aren't those meagre 2lp/mm that important?



Fred.


----------



## Chuchuf

OK all. I just finished spending about 3 hrs with Galen in my shop setting up the HD144 lens's on the subject machine that I mentioned above. Here are my conclusions.


1. The throw distance with everything the same as above moved to 109.5". This equates to about 4" closer than what we actually measured with HD8 lens's/ The width/throw distance multiplier is 1.36875 from the screen to the front mounting bracket on the 808S.


2. The HD144 definately focus sharper than the stock HD8's that come on the 808S. There is no doubt about that. I had no difficulties bringing in edge and corner focus on the machine especially using the Scheimflug adjustments. These lens's focus very wekk which might explain why the NEC XG nonLC focus up so well.


3. Obviously you will need to turn up your G and R on the high end and low end color adjustments to get a proper grey scale. The filtering on these lens's change that. But I had no problems achieving a great grey scale.


4. What has really surprised me about this entire process is that because the apiture of the HD144's is so much smaller than the HD8's, I assumed early on that we might loose some corners or edges of the picture when we opened them up all the way. This just isn't true. I have the yokes set all the way forward on this unit as they are supposed to be. On Galens unit, he played with setting the yokes further back o increase to am absolute maximum the amout of tube face he used (not advised and other potential problems arrise) and he still didn't loose any of his picture.


Fred, That may be a good idea but my question would be where would you get some Cine8 HD8 lens's and any sort of reasonable price. If you know, please tell us. Also the idea behind the upgrade initially is to get the color filtered lens's, and this is a BIG point. Barco 808's and 1208's, have a very orange R and the G is not where it should be. The primary colors are just wrong, and almost to the point with me of I find them hard to watch because I am so used to color corrected/ color filtered machines. The colors of the NEC have always been considered by most to be some of the best in the business, and I have to agree both from a visual and measured (with a spectroradiometer) point. They are spot on. As it seems (I don't know the specs) but from my testing the HD144's and HD145's do focus up better than the HD8's that are delivered by Barco on the 808 series, 1208 series, 801 series Marquee 8000 and 8500.


My opinion, this is a big upgrade. It turns a good CRT into a really really good PJ (I reserve the term GREAT for the G90, modded 9500LC and modded 1209S, and a few more 9"ers).


Most of you might be thinking, "he sells CRT's so this is a sales pitch". Not true. My interest in this was to come up with a way to improve the Barco and Marquee series because of problem I thought they had with their colors for PJ's that I sell, install and set up.

Galen is a good friend of mine with a newly tubed 808S and had an interest in this based on the work previously dove. Filter faper just didn't allow the machines to focus and I just didn't want to try and get colored Glycol to work. So. I supplied him some parts, he came up with the mod and developed it. I am helping him get a few orders for the first few units and them he will be selling this mod himself. And so that you know, I am not making a penny on this (nor do I want to) but felt that I could help both Galen and the Forum by introducing you both to this.


Terry


----------



## pcCinema

Well I guess I will have to take your word for it. I have a set of 144's here, as well as a barco 1208/2 with new tubes in it. I'd love to try it myself, but it's just not in the budget.


One of these days... If I ever get my health back...


Troy


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Terry,


It's nice to hear you got the same improvements that i got, the HD-144 is just amazing.I had the same reservations about the smaller diameter and was really surprised when my first adapter sets where ready.


The color filtered HD-8 is not an option at all, i mounted and calibrated a brand new Cine8 a few weeks ago and the picture isn't even close to the 808s's with HD-144 lenses.


And last time i checked 3M wanted $1300.00 for a set!!!


----------



## draganm




> Quote:
> 4. What has really surprised me about this entire process is that because the apiture of the HD144's is so much smaller than the HD8's, I assumed early on that we might loose some corners or edges of the picture when we opened them up all the way. This



maybe the smaller aperture is exactly why the 144s focus sharper, a smaller face results in reduced refraction from light scattering off the lense face? I'm sure there's a good reason for this, hopefully someone with a background in optics can explain. as far as I'm concerned anough people have cried YIPEEE from me to want a set for my Marquee







I mean it's cool that they work so well on the Barco's, but until someone tests this on a Marquee we haven't proved anything yet.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

There is a actually a Marquee with this lens mod


----------



## WTS

HI, Could you tell me, is the leading edge(rim) of the 144's(the edge closet to the tube) the same distance from the tube face as the original HD8's. If not, what is the difference(measurement). I have a set of these one thier way which I'd like to put on a Ampro 3400, which now has HD8's.


Thanks


----------



## Chuchuf

Walter,

I believe the edge closest to the tube is closer than the HD8's. This mod will work on any PJ with HD8's.


I guess I will have to test on an 8500 I have here for draganm next week sometime when another set gets built . I don't want to take this finished set off this 808S as it's due to ship this Tuesday. I don't see why they wouldn't be just as successful on ANY CRT that uses HD8 lens's??


Terry


----------



## Mr Postman




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *
> 
> Fred, That may be a good idea but my question would be where would you get some Cine8 HD8 lens's and any sort of reasonable price. If you know, please tell us. Also the idea behind the upgrade initially is to get the color filtered lens's, and this is a BIG point. Barco 808's and 1208's, have a very orange R and the G is not where it should be. The primary colors are just wrong, and almost to the point with me of I find them hard to watch because I am so used to color corrected/ color filtered machines. The colors of the NEC have always been considered by most to be some of the best in the business, and I have to agree both from a visual and measured (with a spectroradiometer) point. They are spot on. As it seems (I don't know the specs) but from my testing the HD144's and HD145's do focus up better than the HD8's that are delivered by Barco on the 808 series, 1208 series, 801 series Marquee 8000 and 8500.
> 
> 
> My opinion, this is a big upgrade. It turns a good CRT into a really really good PJ (I reserve the term GREAT for the G90, modded 9500LC and modded 1209S, and a few more 9"ers).
> 
> 
> Most of you might be thinking, "he sells CRT's so this is a sales pitch". Not true. My interest in this was to come up with a way to improve the Barco and Marquee series because of problem I thought they had with their colors for PJ's that I sell, install and set up.
> 
> Galen is a good friend of mine with a newly tubed 808S and had an interest in this based on the work previously dove. Filter faper just didn't allow the machines to focus and I just didn't want to try and get colored Glycol to work. So. I supplied him some parts, he came up with the mod and developed it. I am helping him get a few orders for the first few units and them he will be selling this mod himself. And so that you know, I am not making a penny on this (nor do I want to) but felt that I could help both Galen and the Forum by introducing you both to this.
> 
> 
> Terry*



I'm sorry, but I can't say the Cine8 lens's I saw were cheap. They were priced 3 times as high as what Bjorn listed.










I understood the need for better color, I just couldn't understand if that was the only reason.


I searched the archive for some spec on the HD144, but only found that I had part of the info on my own harddrive, in the XG manual, doh. So with the power of my incredible deduction capabilities I figured NEC wouldn't fit the XG's with inferior lens's to their PG's. Double doh.


So know the $300 question is will the HD144 lens's fit without modification on the a PG6+? (Here's what I'm thinking, I want to move my HD145N lens's to my barco 701s, but then I need a set of new lens for the pg+, and why not get the better ones.)



And I do value your opinion, since, well, you know more than I.












Fred.


----------



## Chuchuf

Fred,


I don't know the answer to the lens fitting on the PG question?? XG's are my forte in the NEC line. I might suggest asking Doug or Marc or one of the others. I just don't remember which lens assy they put on the PG.

But you said HD145N was what came off the PG?? That would imply that the HD144 or the color filtered HD145 would bolt right on in your case??


Terry


----------



## gn2

HD144's, 145's, 6's and 6ML's all have the same footprint and are interchangeable re the mounting. So slap those HD144's onto your PG Plus. The HD145's on your Plus should be color filtered, which should improve the pq of the Toshiba tubed Barco which is plenty bright enough to handle the reduced light output caused by the filtering.


----------



## Mr Postman

Yes my PG has color filtered lens's (HD145N). And the barco has the HD145, only color corrected lens's. First I figured I should buy a new set for my barco, but then I figured, if the 144 are better in any way to the 145 why not use them for the pg, since the pg has better PQ, and move the 145N to the barco, and still get better image for it.










At least my wife'll be happy to know I only "need" to buy one set of lens's.











Thanks

Fred.


----------



## fetz

Hello Terry


I have a few further questions about the Lens change


Do you need 3 of the Rings or 6 because on your Picture there are 6


Can you take off the mounting socket from the Hd-8 without destroying the Lens. You can make the changes ever retour if you want?


Can you take off the mounting Socket from the HD-144 without destroying it, or have you modified the original lens, so you can never put them back on the Orginal Place e.g. a NEC


You put the mounting socket from the HD-8 onto the stripped HD144 using only your adapter rings?


Do you have some better Pictures which you can send by mail


regards


Thomas


----------



## MattPSI

Looks like my post got pulled. Interesting....... We still have tons of the HD-145's, 144's and 6CML's. PM me if anybody needs some.


----------



## MattPSI

The PG's take the HD-6, as well as the 7" barco's. The 144/145 would strap right on.


----------



## Chuchuf

Thomas,

If you read above you will see that the front ring is heated and then put on the HD144 inner lens assy. This is to insure that it holds fast which is important. Galen tried glue with plastic rings but found very quickly that because of the composite materials and lack of surface area the glue there was no assurance it would hold. Especially shipping PJ's and toeing in the lens's during setup and adjusting the lens.

To which he came up with the idea that the front ring needs to be made out of aluminium milled a few thousands small and then heated and put on the HD144 lens assy. It isn't going anywhere after that. He also adds some tabe to the end of the front ring for the adjusters and slider and they are nicely machined and bolted on to the ring. There is also a rear ring that is there to insure centering of the lens assy in the HD8 rear mounting assy. This he is still making out of plastic and made tight and glued in place. This assy is then placed in the rear mounting portion of the HD8 assy. That is the part that actually bolts to your PJ.

What does all this mean. You can take the HD8 rear assy off this HD144 adapted assy and put it back on your HD8 lens assy if you want.

If tiy want to take the adapter rings off the HD144 assy, you would have to carefully press them off or cut them off. They are on tight, and that is the way it has to be for the above reasons.

It takes two rings per lens, 3 front and 3 rear.

Here are a few more pictures of some HD144's that I put on a customers 808S this weekend that we did the measurements on.


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

First


----------



## Chuchuf

Second


----------



## Chuchuf

And finally


----------



## MattPSI

Terry,

You NEC looks a little overweight! Have you done much expirimenting? Any screen shots?


Our warehouse is FULL, we have thousands of parts. If anyone needs anything, let us know, we are cleaning house, so, if you need spares or anything I need to move some stuff. We have a bunch of D50, G70, and G90's coming in this week.

(lets see how long untill this one gets pulled)


----------



## Chuchuf

I didn't take any real screen shots with it up and running in my shop because I'm not much of a photographer.


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

For those of you interested in contacting Galen directly on this lens modification, he has set up an email specifically for that.
[email protected] 


Terry


----------



## Person99




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *1. The throw distance with everything the same as above moved to 109.5". This equates to about 4" closer than what we actually measured with HD8 lens's/ The width/throw distance multiplier is 1.36875 from the screen to the front mounting bracket on the 808S.*



Is the throw distance of the 144 and 145 the same?



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *3. Obviously you will need to turn up your G and R on the high end and low end color adjustments to get a proper grey scale. The filtering on these lens's change that. But I had no problems achieving a great grey scale.*



Tube wear paranoia here. How much higher are we talking, as in the faster wear range (right now I run Contrast at 54 and Brightness at 38 and don't really want to turn up the julice too much higher).


Thanks,

Dave


----------



## Chuchuf

Dave,

I believe the 144's and 145's are about the same throw distance.

I don't think you will get any appreciable difference in wear. Yes you will have to turn up the color balance a bit on R & G because you are now filtering the colors. And you "may" have to turn up contrast a bit, if at all. I wouldn't really worry about it.


Terry


----------



## koldby

As a follow up on Chuchuf's comments: It is only the green and the red that has to be turned up just a little bit ( and probably insignificantly so)and the problem with wear is on the blue tube. Only benefits (from the better color balance) in my opinion.



Koldby


----------



## secstate




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by koldby_
> *As a follow up on Chuchuf's comments: It is only the green and the red that has to be turned up just a little bit ( and probably insignificantly so)and the problem with wear is on the blue tube. Only benefits (from the better color balance) in my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Koldby*



It has been my experience with MEC tubbed Barcos and Marquees which is what most of these are going to be used with that green NOT blue wears the fastest by a significant margin. That said I don't think the slight increase required by these lenses is going to increase that wear by all that much.


----------



## VFRMan

...I've been looking at what other differences will apply to fitting HD-145 on HD-8 machines. One area to consider is the amount of phosphor used for each lens.


My calculation to estimate the difference using the Marq 8520 is:


HD-145 HD-8

Vert raster:

16:9 57.38mm 64.13mm

4:3 76.5mm 85.5mm (the target size)


So this would suggest that the HD-145 use significantly less of the tube face?


Clearly, the two lenses were options on this PJ, but something to consider?


Anyone have a lens throw formula for the HD-144?


Cheers,

Brian


----------



## Chuchuf

Brian,


On the first test machine that galen put together, it was a Barco 808S that we had retubed with 180dvb22 tibes from MEC. These are the same tube as the 180 dmb that is used in the Marquee line. They are also longer than they are in height.

We wanted to see how effective these lens's were at max raster width (which would imply height) because we had some doubts because of the size of the 144/145 apature. So Galen took the scan yokes and movedthem back to achieve max raster, and it all went the lens.

From this we concluded that the 144/145 would work with max raster on the tube face of the 180 series used in the Marquee and Barco line as well as the Sony tubes used in the 808S which is almost square on the tube face.


Terry


----------



## VFRMan

Hi Terry,


I think what you are saying is if you can get the width, which you can, then you will get similar sized raster as you will with any other PJ using the 145/144.


I guess what I'm was trying to show is the general observation between the HD145/144 and the HD8 i.e the HD8 have bigger vertical rasters? (this maybe obvious thinking about it as it is a larger apature lens)


...I'm no expert so be gentle...


Brian


----------



## Chuchuf

Brian,


I am a bit confused?? The HD8 has bigger vertical rater??

The apature (diameter) of the HD8 lens is certainly larger than the Hd145 which is slightly larger than the HD144.

The 180 series tubes are almost square and the Sony 808S tubes have more width than height (I got it backwards in the post above). But the point was that with a round apature you would get equal width and height out of the lens assy?? So as long as the lens assy is centered on the tube, the max width should be the max height. call it 4:4


Being gentle...

Terry


----------



## VFRMan

Terry,


This is what I did: I used a lens throw tool for the Marq 8520 PJ which provides a calculation of vert phosphor being used for different lenses and screen aspect ratios (it provides a comment if not all the phospohor is used). Clearly, different phosphor will be used for a 4:3 and 16:9, I was interested in how the two lenses compared for the same screen size output.


This gave the numbers I posted earlier. From this I concluded that the difference between the two lenses also included the image size they required to be set on the tube faces for the same screen size output?


So, with max horizontal width, each lens will have a different vert size due to the charactoristics of the lens.


Have word from Galen, should be receiving the modded lenses soon...

Brian


----------



## WTS

Hi Terry,


Would you be able to tell me if having the HD144's about 5/8" farther away from the tube face than the HD8's were is going to cause any problems in the projected pic size. I doubt if the focus would be affected because it can be adjusted.

Hmmm, second try to explain it maybe alittle clearer.

The first lense in the HD8 is 3/8" away from the tube face when mounted, and if I go with making an flat adapter plate to mount the HD144 to, which then mounts to the original holes to which the HD8 was mounted to, it will put the first lenses of the 144 about 1" from the tube face. Now will that cause any problems.


Thanks


----------



## cmjohnson

Yes, you can expect it will. Just the same as if you try to use a microscope

or telescope and your eye is too far from the eyepiece, this will cause a serious

lack of optimal peformance.


CJ


----------



## WTS

Okay, so what would be the optimal distance that the 144 should be from the tube face. I don't know, but I would think the HD8 and the HD144 have different specs for what the optimal distance from the tube should be.


----------



## cmjohnson

I'd suggest giving the technical staff at Vikuiti (Formerly 3M Precision Optics) an email and asking them for the specs on the lenses.


CJ


----------



## WTS

YEa I just sent an email to 3M optics, that swho came up when I googled, but I'll try Vikuiti.


Thanks CJ


----------



## Mark_A_W




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by WTS_
> *Okay, so what would be the optimal distance that the 144 should be from the tube face. I don't know, but I would think the HD8 and the HD144 have different specs for what the optimal distance from the tube should be.*



From what I understand, the "optimum" distance is when the centre focuses. Full stop. Period.


Have a look at what moving the centre focus knob (closest to tubeface) does to the back of the lenses - it moves it relative to the tube face. It will only focus in one spot - so if it's focused, it's in the correct spot.


So if you can get good centre focus within the range of the centre focus adjustment knob, doesn't matter where in the range for this knob - then it's all good.










Mark


----------



## WTS

Hi Mark,

Okay thats sounds reasonable. So does that mean that the first concave piece of glass is not really part of the focusing, because I don't believe that this part moves. But if you look inside the lens from the tube side you can see a smaller lens(which looks to be about 2 1/2" in diameter) which I do believe moves when you rotate the case, the set screw closest to the tube. I guess this is the first section of focusing. I have no experience in lenses, as you can probably tell.


Thanks


----------



## Mark_A_W

When you move the first adjuster screw/knob, closest to the tube face, you change the distance from the first concave lens to the tube face - this part absolutely moves.


So the centre focus is set by this distance, so the first concave lens is part of the focusing - but in a roundabout way.


The edge focus (other knob) moves the front half of the lens relative to the first part (the concave bit). I believe this adjusment should be close to central - this is driven by your screensize/throw.


LC lenses seem to work different to me - they interact, unlike the adjustments on a AC lens.


----------



## Chuchuf

Walter,

If you go do a search for the adapters that Bjorn did for adapting the HD144's to the Barco, you will find the distance he gives which are exactly correct on where the HD144 lens needs to be.


Terry


----------



## WTS

Hi Mark,


Well I know for sure that the first piece of glass(closet to the tube) does not move in either the hd8 or hd144. They are fastened in place, the hd8 has screws around the perimeter and the hd144 has the lens barrel threaded and a threaded ring to hold it in place. The inside pieces move though(obviously I guess).

Thanks for your info and help, next time you pull your lens off have a look at the first piece of glass.


----------



## Mark_A_W

I must admit I don't quite understand what you are seeing.


While I haven't pulled a 144N off my pj - and I'm not going to ruin my flapping just to look - I do have a 145N sitting right in front of me.


But the 144 looks to work exactly the same way as the 145 - without removing it of course.


And the first adjustment (centre) moves the body of the lense- including the C element (the first curved one)- as a single item, toward and away from the lens mount/tube face.


Like this: Adjustment away from tube


----------



## Mark_A_W

And this: Adjustment towards tube face.


If this is different in the 144, then I most humbly apologise for leading you up the garden path.


Mark


----------



## Chuchuf

Walter,


I'm not sure I follow you here. When you adjust the rear optical focus adjustment, you are moving the entire lens body (which includes the rear lens) back and forth making it closer and further from the CRT glass.


Terry


----------



## WTS

Hi , Yea I'm probably the one who is confused here. I never tried moving the rear adjustment to see if the lense actually moved, it just looked like it was fixed in place. This is the first time I've seen lens this big. I'll have to play alittle with them. I'm sure you guys are correct and I'm out in left field on this. If that lense moves closer and farther from the tube like you say then I don't see why there would be a problem mounting the lens body alittle farther from the tube face. Hopefully there will be enough adjustment to compensate for the extra distance.

I'll have a look when I get home tonight and then I'll probably be the one apologizing to you guys for my confusion. Thats why its nice to have guys like you around who can set a guy on the right track.


Thanks


----------



## Chuchuf

Walter,

You have it and have answered your own question.

It is the relationship of the rear of the lens body (in fact the rear most lens) to the face of the CRT glass that determines the focal point for the lens for a given throw distance. In other words for a given throw distance, there is only one very exact distance from the CRT glass that makes the lens focus. You cannot change that.

Look at the slot that the rear oprtical focus adjustment follows and you will understand what I mean.


Terry


----------



## WTS

Hi Mark and Terry, You guys were right, the first lense does move in and out with the rear adjustment. It doesn't move very much past the end of the housing, I just hope it moves enough in the direction towards the tube face to focus.


Thanks for your help and info on this.


----------



## Chuchuf

Just thought I would post what one of Galens first set of adapter looked like on someone BG808S. Here are his comments:


">Hey Galen,


I didn't turn on the pj on Tues day and did get some time last night to watch a movie. The good news is that I think the HTPC was causing the problems I was describing. This time it must have synced correctly with the pj and the image looks far sharper. I still haven't moved it closer as I'm trying to figure out how I can arrange the furniture so that the Barco is not sitting in the middle of the room. It's just acceptable now but if I have to move it another 10 or so inches.... My idea is to take the pj off its stand, put it on the floor then have the couch straddle the pj. Not great for the WAF, but that's OK as I don't have one.


Anyway the best way I can describe the image is that a veil was taken away. I guess that's partly due to the plastic gel filters being removed from the light path and the better all-glass optics of the HD144's. I can now see what everyone has been raving about. The colors are to die for, highly saturated and accurate, even on the 125" image I'm getting at the moment. Interestingly enough the blacks are better too and there is probably a good optical explanation for that too.


If you need any references for your work, look no further. This has been a very elegant answer to our prayers. My hat is off to you. Please relay this to Terry. "


Love when a plan comes together.


Terry


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Terry, all,


All in all a cool idea. I really like the idea. I just can't get warm with

the idea of using a heat press-fit to keep the lenses on (I know they'll

hold, but.....







)


I'm thinking of machining some new mounts for my Marquee. All that needs

to be "adjusted" are the four lens mounting holes and the main hole in

the center. Other than that I can just copy the original E-home design.


Could some kind soul please tell me the exact size of the lens barrel

diameter below the mounting flange and the distance between the 4

mounting holes, since I don't have a set of HD-144 or HD-145s. Which

brings me to my next question:


Does anyone out there have a good (no scratches or dings please) set of

color corrected and color filtered HD-144 or HD-145 lenses for me? If so,

please take into consideration ($$ wise please include s&h







) that I live

in Europe.


Thanks !


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Chuchuf

Check w/ Matt PSI I think he has some HD144's or 145's.

I'm on the road so someone else will have to help you with dimensions.


Terry


----------



## Lightningman

Hi guys,


@Terry: Thanks for the info. Will shoot Matt a PM.


@all

C'mon, some has to have the dimensions I'm looking for










BTW, when I wrote no dings or scratches, I meant the lenses of course.

I mean some has got to have a set of lenses they what to sell

















Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## gn2

I have the lens to measure, but no method that I can think of that is reliable enough for you to machine aluminum plates from. Maybe I could trace it on a piece of paper and fax it to you ??

Sorry I only have the set attached to my XG1350, can't sell them unless you want the whole machine, cheap.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Paul,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *I have the lens to measure, but no method that I can think of that is reliable enough for you to machine aluminum plates from. Maybe I could trace it on a piece of paper and fax it to you ??*



It doesn't have to be down to the last tenth of a mm







Do you have a

caliper? What I need is the maximum size the lenses have (at the barrel

below the flange). That way I can make the hole 2-3mm smaller. When

I have a set of lenses, I would just need to turn out the hole a tiny bit,

making for a perfect individual fit. Of course, I >could
a set of lenses here, but I have some spare time now










Measuring the mounting hole to hole distance should be possible with

a caliper. Just measure from end of hole to end of hole and subtract 1

times the hole diameter.


I'm afraid if you trace it out and fax it, the fax might distort the picture.



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *Sorry I only have the set attached to my XG1350, can't sell them unless you want the whole machine, cheap.*



Well I REALLY would consider it, but s&h (and import duty fees) would

probably kill me. AND you don't really want to sell that PJ










Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## gn2

Well, I REALLY want a set of tubes for it, but after my friends disaster with VDC, I'll NEVER EVER buy tubes from them, so finding reasonable used ones is my only hope.

Shipping to you would not be all that much if you could take it by sea, I'd bet...

PS: I do have a caliper, I'll have to dig it out(if I can find it) and make those measurements for you.


----------



## Mark_A_W




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Lightningman_
> *Hi Paul,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't have to be down to the last tenth of a mm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a
> 
> caliper? What I need is the maximum size the lenses have (at the barrel
> 
> below the flange). That way I can make the hole 2-3mm smaller. When
> 
> I have a set of lenses, I would just need to turn out the hole a tiny bit,
> 
> making for a perfect individual fit. Of course, I >could
> a set of lenses here, but I have some spare time now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Measuring the mounting hole to hole distance should be possible with
> 
> a caliper. Just measure from end of hole to end of hole and subtract 1
> 
> times the hole diameter.
> 
> 
> I'm afraid if you trace it out and fax it, the fax might distort the picture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I REALLY would consider it, but s&h (and import duty fees) would
> 
> probably kill me. AND you don't really want to sell that PJ
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Reinhard*



A HD145 is 132.2 to 133mm in diameter at the bottom. The 144's are on the ceiling, and I aren't pulling them down


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Paul,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *Well, I REALLY want a set of tubes for it, but after my friends disaster with VDC, I'll NEVER EVER buy tubes from them, so finding reasonable used ones is my only hope.
> 
> Shipping to you would not be all that much if you could take it by sea, I'd bet...
> 
> PS: I do have a caliper, I'll have to dig it out(if I can find it) and make those measurements for you.*



That would be cool. Thanks a bunch.


I haven't had any contact with VDC and Bill Blue did tell me some of his

problems with VDC. It took Bill a while to convince them










Just for the fun of it, the next time you have to find out s&h charges,

ask what it would cost to send a PJ overseas.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Mark,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Mark_A_W_
> *A HD145 is 132.2 to 133mm in diameter at the bottom. The 144's are on the ceiling, and I aren't pulling them down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Thanks for the info. Is this measured or taken from memory (or datasheet).

Of course, I understand that you don't want to pull the HDs just because

some fricken foreigner is asking for some silly numbers
























Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Mark_A_W

I have a HD145 sitting right next to me.

I used a steel rule, but if you want REALLY accurate measurements I can take it to work and use calipers (or even the CMM - a new toy).


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Mark,


> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Mark_A_W_
> *I have a HD145 sitting right next to me.
> 
> I used a steel rule, but if you want REALLY accurate measurements I can take it to work and use calipers (or even the CMM - a new toy).*



That would be cool if could spare the time. The 145 have the same

barrel diameter as 144 AFAIK (true / not true?).


Enlighten me please what is a CMM? The only CMM I know is the

Center for Molecular Modeling


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Mark_A_W

Coordinate Measurement Machine.


I don't know if 144's and 145's are the same, and I'm not ruining my Flapping to find out, I'm sorry.


----------



## gn2

Ok, according to my digital caliper, they are 133.4 mm across the bottom. From mount hole to mount hole across the center, its 145.26mm.

The mount holes are 6.51mm.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Paul,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *Ok, according to my digital caliper, they are 133.4 mm across the bottom. From mount hole to mount hole across the center, its 145.26mm.
> 
> The mount holes are 6.51mm.*



Thanks for the measurement. Since your values and those of Mark

coincide, I know both of you can measure





















.


That's interesting. So the mount holes of the HD 145 sit almost smack

in the middle of the empty space between lens and mounting plate on

a Marquee. U.S. Precision must have done that on purpose to prevent

us modders from interchanging the lenses

















Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Chuchuf

Yup.....

144's and 145's have the same mounting holes.


Terry


----------



## Larry Fine

If I may ask, what effect would these lenses have on throw distance for a given image size? Would they let me move the 8500 12 to 18 inches closer with no or little size reduction?


----------



## Chuchuf

Closer but not quite that much closer.


Terry


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Terry,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *Yup.....
> 
> 144's and 145's have the same mounting holes.
> 
> Terry*



Thanks for the info!


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Paul,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> 
> From mount hole to mount hole across the center, its 145.26mm.
> 
> The mount holes are 6.51mm. [/b]



One last question: Is the 145.26mm from moutng hole center to

mounting hole center? Or is it from mounting hole edge to mounting

hole edge? I.e. my question is the 145.26 the center distance or do

I need to subtract 1x the hole size from this dimension?


Oh and hope you and Mark didn't take my comment:


"Since your values and those of Mark coincide, I know both of you

can measure."


seriously. It was meant as a joke. I sincerly thank you for doing

the measurements for me!


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## gn2

Inner edge of the mounting hole to inner edge of the mounting hole, that is why I gave you the size of the mounting hole too...

I take no offense at anything said on this forum by anyone, why would I ??


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Paul,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *Inner edge of the mounting hole to inner edge of the mounting hole, that is why I gave you the size of the mounting hole too...
> *



Ah, okay, so center-center would be 151.7mm. Thanks for clarification!




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by gn2_
> *I take no offense at anything said on this forum by anyone, why would I ??*



Phew. Good!


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi guys,


Just as a tidbit of info, have a look at what I posted here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...62#post5438062 


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## VFRMan

Hi,


The modified lenses arrived and I've now fitted them and here are my findings:


1, Galen's mod works very well, and allowed the HD-8 base to be used with the HD-144's. No problems with them to date and they have run for about 4 hours continuous on 5 occasions.


2. Colour filtered lenses move my BG808s into a different league, very impressed, reds and browns vast improvement.


3. Image is more 3D and halo reduced also, much easier to grey scale calibrate.


4. Using same brightness and contrast settings as before.


5. Reduced screen to projector distance by 11 inches and happy with a little less phosphor than I had with the HD-8 lenses.


Now all that's left to do is set up the NTSC/PAL 4:3 and D-VHS input....


My thanks go to Terry for starting the process, Matt and Michelle at PSI for the lenses and organising shipping and Galen for the mod that works.


Cheers,

Brian


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Walter,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by WTS_
> *Hi Mark and Terry, You guys were right, the first lense does move in and out with the rear adjustment. It doesn't move very much past the end of the housing, I just hope it moves enough in the direction towards the tube face to focus.
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help and info on this.*



If you are hoping that the original HD 144 /145 mount will fit to a new

mounting plate (designed for the HD-144/145s) **AND** that the 144/145

will have enough adjustment range to be able to focus the original HD-8

tube to the screen, sorry but you are totally out of luck. The original 144

design will *NOT* provide enough backward movement to be able to focus

properly.


I tried moving the guide screws on the 144s (there are three bosses on

the lens equipped to take the guide screws), but it still doesn't provide

enough movement.


Right now I'm machining the outer holder of the HD 144's to see if I can

get the lens assembly to move in far enough (I have my doubts). Since

this part isn't used in Galen's / Terry's design, I have nothing to loose.


In the end G/T's design is probably the best way to go. There is no need

to machine a new set of mounting plates for the HD-144 vs the HD-8.

Swapping back is easy as you just have to remove the HD-144/HD-8

assembly, remove the HD-8 outer ring, put it back on your HD-8 and

reinstall the HD-8 lens.


I did a quick and dirty setup of the 144's on my Marquee. The difference

in green isn't that noticeable (but it's there). This didn't surprise me as

the 144 green isn't tinted that heavy. However, the red lens makes all

the difference. The orangish-yellowish red is gone. Its a true red. This will

make a difference in a lot of color tones esp. including browns and flesh

tones.


The magnification of the lens is higher. I put the HD-144 on the Marquee's

red vs the original HD-8 on the green. With COLOR 4 (IIRC) you can switch

off the blue tube and see the difference on a test grid (144 vs 8). The

corner focus seems to be easier to do with the 144s. Using the HD-8 I had

to do a lot of flips bewteen Scheimpflug and corner focus (front lens barrel).

I had the impression that this was easier and quicker to do with the 144's

Not quite sure why, tho.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi guys (esp CJ and tse







)


For clarity, I broke up the post into three parts.


Since there is a Marquee (the HD-800 relabeled by TAW) out there with

HD-145s as a standard lens (probably the reason why VDC offers the

plates at all as found out by CJ), I'm wondering how they accomplished

the feat of matching a standard 145 to a standard Marquee.


I cannot by the life of me imagine that they resigned the whole mechanical

setup just to fit the HD 145s. That would be much too expensive.


Does anyone (CJ or tse maybe?) have any pictures of a Marquee with HD-

145's installed as a standard? A view from the side of a tube - lens

mounting plate would be helpful.


The only thing I can imagine is that they used shorter Scheimpflug springs

in the assembly and therefore bringing the mounting plate (and the lens)

closer to the tube. However, I'm not quite sure (which is why I didn't try

this) if the ventilation holes for the forced air cooling of the tubes and

neckboards are large enough to be able to do this. Of course, TAW may

have also exchanged the cover plate of the belly fans to overcome this

problem.


CJ, since you have contacts to VDC, maybe you could ask one of the

knowledgable guys what is needed to convert a HD-8 Marquee into a

HD-144 Marquee.


Same question also addressed to tse










Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Chuchuf

Reinhard,

Glad to see you confirmed what Galen had done.

He has actually been sort of looking at another way to do this but hasn' formalized it as it will require that he build some tools for his machine work and he hasn't had time lately.



Terry


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Terry,


So far it seems like I will be going the G/T way, since my original idea

won't work







I do have a couple of questions for you and Galen.



- Why did you guys go the heat shrink method? Couldn't you use

recessed set screws( ~ 3 set at 120° per spacer)? The main thing

I don't like about heat and shrink method is that if you don't get it

100% in the first few seconds, you have a big problem on your

hands










- Are you using the original adjustment slots in the HD-8 outer assembly

or did you mill new ones? (basically what I am trying right now with the

original HD-144 outer shells).


- Where did you place the guide pins / locking screws? Did you put them

on the rearward spacer ring or did you use the original mounting bosses

of the HD-144 / 145's? From a quick look it seems as if the original mounting

bosses paired with the original HD-8 adjustment slots won't provide quite

enough backward movement (in my case the HD-144 rearmost lens must

extend a bit beyond the HD-8 housing to achieve focus on my 98" screen)


- Do you have any pictures of partial assmebly (rings on the HD-144/145s)

before and after the new assmebly goes into the HD-8 outer ring?


- Measurements, drawings, news, pictures or infos in general would greatly

be appreciated










Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## cmjohnson

I haven't followed this too closely lately.


Are you saying that the HD-144s need to have their rear element spaced

closer to the CRT face than an HD-8?


If so, the solution is simple to me. Reverse the mounting plate. The lens

would be bolted to the plate from BEHIND. However, this requires you to

remove and reinstall the scheimpflug mounting bolts in order to put the

lens assembly in place. Just like AmPro 4x00 series projectors. They mount

their lenses on the rear of the plate, too.


BTW, I found some HD-144s in my friend's warehouse with all his other

AmPro parts, and have also learned that the color corrected C elements

for 144s/145s are available separately just like they are for HD10s, but

before I order any, I need to learn more about the lenses.



CJ


----------



## Lightningman

Hi CJ,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by cmjohnson_
> *
> 
> Are you saying that the HD-144s need to have their rear element spaced
> 
> closer to the CRT face than an HD-8?
> 
> 
> If so, the solution is simple to me. Reverse the mounting plate. The lens
> 
> would be bolted to the plate from BEHIND. However, this requires you to
> 
> remove and reinstall the scheimpflug mounting bolts in order to put the
> 
> lens assembly in place. Just like AmPro 4x00 series projectors. They mount
> 
> their lenses on the rear of the plate, too.
> 
> 
> CJ*



The 144 need to be closer to the tube than the HD-8. The problem is

actually twofold. The original HD-8 already come closer to the tube than

the HD144. In their original design, both lenses extend slightly beyond the

rear of the outer shell. However, the lip of the outer shell of the HD-8

already protrudes behind the aluminum mounting plate (i.e. it sits closer

to the tube than the 144 would) in the original HD-8 design.


I'm not quite clear what you mean by reversing the mounting plate. Do

you mean to turn it around? That won't work, since it has pockets milled

into the rear face to accept the Scheimpflug springs and the mounting

pivot is centered to the thickness of the plate (so flipping it around won't

bring it closer to the tube)


If you mean keeping the plate and just mounting the HD-144 from behind

(so that it protrudes through the plate from behind), this won't work for

three reasons.


- One being that the circle of the mounting holes of the 144 are smaller

than the opening of the HD-8 (you couldn't mount it).


- Two: there would be light leakage between the HD-144 and the original

HD-8 hole.


- Three: In order to get a light tight fit, you would need to machine a

new plate AND remove the strengthening bosses on the original 144

design (in order to leave a flat mounting surface to mate the 144 to the

new plate). This would weaken the mounting bosses so far that I would

assume they would snap off the first time you tried to adjust the lens.


I'm pretty sure all that TAW did was to replace the springs and maybe the

belly fan plate. Since the original Marquee SM doesn't list the 145 and I

don't have a SM for the HD-800 (I'm not even sure there is one, since

electrically its just an 8000), I can't see what parts are different and I was

hoping VDC could give a list of the exchange parts.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## draganm

In addition to having to remove the re-inforcing web on the mounting tabs mounting a lense from behind (and through) the mounting the plate would make taking the lenses off a pain in the but. The biggest problem with this swap anyway is the change in throw distance, most people ( myself included) already have our machines cieling mounted so taking the PJ down and re-doing the whole bracket is no small task. In my case it's not even an option as my ceiling drops down just in front of my PJ. I have been following this thead and think it's very interesting but I wish there was a third option for 8" non LC machines


----------



## Chuchuf

In Galens design, the back of the HD144 lens can touch the glass face of the CRT assy. There is also no light leakage in his design.


Terry


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Terry,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *There is also no light leakage in his design.
> 
> Terry*



Obviously







My comments (aside from the fact that removing the mounting

plates to center the raster on the tube being a PITA) where directed to

CJ's idea to mount the HD 144's from behind.



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Chuchuf_
> *In Galens design, the back of the HD144 lens can touch the glass face of the CRT assy.*



I saw your picture of the 144/8 hybrid. That's why I was wondering where

you guys added the pivot bolts (my questions from above). I didn't want to

bother Galen directly, as you said he doesn't have time to post here and

only reads the forum occasionally.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi draganm,



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by draganm_
> *In addition to having to remove the re-inforcing web on the mounting tabs mounting a lense from behind (and through) the mounting the plate would make taking the lenses off a pain in the but. The biggest problem with this swap anyway is the change in throw distance, most people ( myself included) already have our machines cieling mounted so taking the PJ down and re-doing the whole bracket is no small task. In my case it's not even an option as my ceiling drops down just in front of my PJ. I have been following this thead and think it's very interesting but I wish there was a third option for 8" non LC machines
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



That's why I love my floor mounted PJ







Seriously, tho. would it be an

option to move the screen? Not sure if you have a ceiling mounted

screen (motorized) or if it's a fixed frame "tacked" to the wall?


Other than the 144/145 option all you could try is to get a hold of the

(high $$$) colored elements for the HD-8. AFAIK, however, they are OOP,

so you would need to look for surplus. Or try the colored glycol route.

It seems as if some Sony tubes have the same chamber volume as the

MECs.


Oh and those of you who might be worried about getting the raster to

fit with the HD-144s, don't worry. I opened up my raster all the way up

to the tube edges and it'll still fit within the 144's aperature with no

problems.


The rearmost lens on the HD-144s has a lot less curvature to it than

the HD-8. It's almost a flat surface. From what little I know on optics

(I'm more the electronics guy







), this could explain why the edge focus

is better on the 144's


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## cmjohnson

If color correction is what you're after, another forum member (I can not and do

not take credit for this) pointed out that the CRTs in your air coupled Marquees

have a coolant tank attached to them (180DMB or DVB or some P16 series) and

if you wanted, you could drain the coolant out (or at least some of it) and

replace it with salvaged colored coolant from old Sony tubes. Instant cure!


Taking a cue from that idea, I have taken samples of coolant from a spot

burned AmPro CRT assembly and have made up a sample of coolant dyed

with red metal complex dye, and another sample dyed with green metal

complex dye, and the colors look very much like I think they should. I have

placed the sample jars on the roof of my house and will let the Florida sun

attack them for a few weeks or months to see if the colors are colorfast

for long periods of time. If they don't fade, I will put some in the coolant

tank assemblies and try them out on the projector. I will measure the CIE

color coordinates of the results, too.


No doubt some of you recall Spatz's expensive Sony-type coolant coloring

concentrate. I took great exception to the pricing.


This stuff would be much cheaper. Twoof ounces of the concentrated

metal complex dyes costs about 15 bucks, and it only takes a few drops to

color enough coolant to fill any LC reservoir. It's available from

Stewart-MacDonald, a guitar shop supply company. http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Finishin...id_Stains.html 


The stuff is claimed to be lightfast, but I want to check that in this application

before being sure of it. It may have a reaction with ethylene glycol that

might not be beneficial.



Anyone who wants to play with this stuff too, be my guest!


CJ


----------



## Lightningman

Hi draganm,


I was talking about this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ghlight=wonsug 


I'm not sure if he is the originator of the idea, tho. Björn has also

done quite a bit of experimentation on this subject. However, he

commented that the color glycol vs. the 144s was no match. There

was more improvement to be had with the 144's


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Gary Murrell

My adding of sony colored glycol to my mec tubes bested the hd-144 lenses, the 144's give almost a artificial red, while the sony glycol gave truely awesome colors


-Gary


----------



## Chuchuf

Gary,

I find this statement of the 144's giving an almost artificial red curious. Seems to me that I thought I read somewhere you had a colorimeter??

Did you measure the x,y coordinates of the 144's and the sony glycol?? When you put the 144's on your PJ did you readjust the grey scale. How about when you added the colored glycol?

I'm not disputing what you are saying I'm just curious about it??


Terry


----------



## Chuchuf

Oh I see it was in your other thread that I asked you the same question (I thought I had asked it.....). So disregard.

Well yes and no.

What you are really saying here is that acording to what you can see with your eye, you feels that the reds are better with the colored glycol.

I would venture to say that you never had the PJ properly calibrated without using something to measure the greyscale with.


Terry


----------



## Gary Murrell

Terry


I actually did calibrate my greyscale when using both the hd-144 lenses and using the new colored glycol I just added


I use a Spyder2 which suprisingly works just as it should, my greyscale is currently 6346K for 20IRE and 6510K for 100IRE, what a difference the proper greyscale makes, true blacks are a really nice compared to my eyeballed low end of 17000K at 20IRE


I still honestly think that the sony glycol gives better colors, I am amazed at the colors more so than when I had my hd-144's


If someone would explain to me how to check the XY of the colors I would gladly do so, I am sure the software for the spyder2 is out there


-Gary


----------



## Chuchuf

Yes I thought you had a Spyder2...

Can it measure he primary colors??


Terry


----------



## Gary Murrell

Just watched "North by Northwest" with the family for moms day, if you are fimiliar with the movie there is a red hat scene brought to attention by the movies plot

that was enough to make a believer out of me


Terry I am going to investigate if i can take primary readings


-Gary


----------



## Javers

Gary, surely the 144's can't make the picture too red? I mean they can't add any more red to the tube that isn't already there? only remove other colours that shouldn't be there, ie the orange. Or is it we're just not used to seeing red in its full glory? Does all red phosphur (including that used in crt tv's and pc monitors) emit this orange tint?


Jon


----------



## Gary Murrell

Jon, No I don't mean too much red, what I simply meant was that I preffered the Sony Glycol to the hd-144 lenses


the red from the lenses has a slightly different saturation and tint than the glycol, I quite simply slightly preffered the red from the glycol over the shade from the hd-144's


-Gary


----------



## Javers

OK now I understand, looking forward to seeing the readings with the spyder.


Jon


----------



## Gary Murrell

If I can figure it out










-Gary


----------



## virusc

I have felt that sometimes too with the colored liquid. Don't know why and it does not make sense to me. (lenses I used were 145 color filtered for that test)


----------



## Lightningman

Hi guys,


Okay, this only partially has something to do with the 8 to 144 conversion, but

I thought you might like it.


Well, the first thing I noticed, when I got my set of HD-144's where those UGLY

looking wing nuts on the adjusters. Was I supposed to live with that







. Nope,

NO way







Here's what it started out as:


----------



## Lightningman

Knurling and further machine work


----------



## Lightningman

Drilling and cut off work


----------



## Lightningman

fine "tuning"







the other side and thread cutting. It's 8-32 JFYI The

syringe contains isoprop alcohol, which is the best cutting fluid around

AlMg3


----------



## Chuchuf

Nice work. Can't wait to see what your adapters come out like.


Terry


----------



## Lightningman

The results and on the PJ. The last picture shows the orginal(s) and the

modded (new) units. It took me about 4.5 hours to make these 6 knobs

(and I would call myself an experienced machinist), just for those that

buck about the prices (in general)

















P.S.: Sorry for some of the blurr in the pictures, but they where partially done

during actual machine work, so I kind of had to watch the machine, my fingers









and take the pictures all at the same time
















Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Terry,



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chuchuf* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nice work. Can't wait to see what your adapters come out like.
> 
> 
> Terry



Thanks! I'll post similar pictures once they're done. Right now I have to find a way

around using PTFE (500 Euro quote on raw material for 18 rings 500 x 500 x25

mm). It needs to have self lubricating properties. I'll probably go for Delrin (a POM

derivative), but it needs to be watered before machine work as it absorbs

moisture from the air, which causes dimensional changes. These would cause

lens binding if you don't get the moisture into the plastic before machining.


I have most of the rest figured out. Bummer that I couldn't modify the original

144 rear housing to get ot to work. I'm honestly thinking of machining these

adapter rings on a CNC

























Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Javers

Thought i'd post the progress of my experimental MDF adapters, if they work its gonna be a mini miracle! Here's the rings attached to the hd145 blue lens (no glue yet, just pushed on tight)


----------



## Javers

Fits into the housing quite snugly, I was surprised to find it would actually rotate quite smoothly. Don't think it would withstand hundreds of re-focus evenings though!


----------



## Javers

And lastly attached to the BG808s. Once finished the mdf will be painted black of course. Only two more sets to make and the pj remount to go, then I find out if they're gonna expand / shrink and move around up there










Jon


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Jon,


Interesting idea, but I think you'll run into some problems. MDF will absorb

moisture if not fully painted (inside and out), which will cause dimensional

changes. The problem is that you would need to know how thick your

paint job is going to be (to be able to adjust the diameters). Once painted,

I'm not sure how easy focus adjustment will be, since the paint has a high

drag coefficient. Also, I'm not sure how MDF will hold up to repeated

movement. You will probably need to glue the adjustment stud to the MDF

(MDF isn't known for strength, it might strip out as you move the lens by

applying force to the knob / stud).


Please DON'T take my comments the wrong way. AND don't let yourself become

discouraged about what I wrote







These where just some thoughts passing

through my mind.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Javers

Hi Reinhard,


No offence taken! I know this isn't a patch on the other adapters out there, but so far this one has cost me nothing and i'm having fun experimenting. Appreciate the tip about the mdf absorbing moisture (i'd originally only planned to paint the fronts and backs of the rings). I'll definatly glue the stud in place, and try and only focus once then never touch again!


Jon


----------



## Chuchuf

Good job Jon!! Where there is a will and a lack of budget/tools there is a way.


Terry


----------



## Pinballwizard

I don't get it, I hear people taking highly of the NEC PG XG PJS, and how the colors and the pictures are so good, Why don't they just sell the Barcos and get NEC's intstead of parting out NEC to make BARCOS up to NEC standards...HMM


----------



## cmjohnson

Maybe it's because the NECs aren't as good a machine despite their color qualities?



Just guessing.


CJ


----------



## Chuchuf

Pinball,

The reason that folks have been adding the color filtered HD144 or HD145 lens to their Barco and Marquee machines is that:

1. They already own the machine and usually it has good tubes.

2. Both brands are good 8" CRT's

3. Work had been done last year by Bjorne that showed that there was an improvement in focus, primary and secondary colors when adding these lens's. This had a distinct advantage over using the Roscoe filters that had been used in the past

4. There were HD144 and 145 lens's available on the secondary markets at reasonable prices.

5. Mods to improve the performance of your CRT is very much a part of this hobby.


Terry


----------



## draganm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pinballwizard* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I don't get it, I hear people taking highly of the NEC PG XG PJS, and how the colors and the pictures are so good, Why don't they just sell the Barcos and get NEC's intstead of parting out NEC to make BARCOS up to NEC standards...HMM



I doubt anyone is parting out working NECs to upgrade Barcos, unless the machine is a complete basket-case. There's plenty of 145s on flea-bay right now. Good to see other machinists on the AVS but this seems like an awfull amount of trouble just to mount a smaller lense. Too bad we can't easily upgrade M8500s and 808s to LC versions and forget about HD145s.


----------



## cmjohnson

Incidentally, if you have NON-color filtered HD-145s (or maybe 144s as well), you can order

color filtered red and green elements for them from VDC. I've seen them, and the containers

they come in.


CJ


----------



## Lightningman

Hi CJ, guys,



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cmjohnson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Incidentally, if you have NON-color filtered HD-145s (or maybe 144s as well), you can order
> 
> color filtered red and green elements for them from VDC. I've seen them, and the containers
> 
> they come in.
> 
> 
> CJ



The question is what do they cost. From what I know about VDC or 3M prices,

probably more than a set of good used 144's or 145 (already equipped with

colored elements). Probably not worth the effort. Dunno for sure tho.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## cmjohnson

Well, new red or green C elements for HD10s are 100 bucks each, delivered.


CJ


----------



## Prehjan

Hi folks

I have been looking into putting some different lenses on my marquee...not sure how much of a difference it would make...has anyone put Gt17..instead of the hd8b's??


what does it invlove ?


Martin


----------



## surrey lad

I'm on the look out for a set of rings and HD145s for my new 8110+, or is this old news










PM doesn't seem to be working (either that or i'm being blanked)!!


This tread deserves a bump anyway!!










Good work guys.


----------



## RolfHult

I got an deal on HD144 for my Marquee 8500. Are there avaiable adapters around?


E-mailed Galen at '[email protected]' ...no response...










Edit: Could we get the data sheet on the Galen adapters?


----------



## RolfHult

bump


----------



## j lyon2564

Here is the link for the adapters pm me if your interested.


jlyon



http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...adapter+plates


----------



## j lyon2564

Rolf


I sent paul his signature name is Gn2 a set.He may see this and comment or you can pm him .


jlyon


----------



## armstrr

i bought a set of adaptor plates to mount a set of 145s to my marquee. my question is: what distance i need to set the LENSE from the tubes face. I believe with the original lenses, the correct distance was 27 or 17mm from the aluminum plate to the tube face. should i use this info to set the new lenses to the same distance as the old ones or do these need to be spaced differently?


thanks,

robb


----------



## RolfHult

When the barrel is pushed all back, you need only ca 2mm clearing from the lens>tubeface (You need to cut those springs in half).


Here are som pic of my adapters on my Ehome 8500;


----------



## tse

Doesn't this introduce significant vignetting? What would really be cool is to have HD10 size lenses or larger that were color filtered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vignetting


----------



## cmjohnson

I note that HD-8B lenses have larger exit apertures than HD-10s. Maybe HD-8Bs would therefore actually show LESS vignetting than HD-10s. Just a guess.


On my 9500LC, I DO use the contrast modulation option and it's set up so my screen brightness is VERY uniform. But I realize that this is actually driving the outer periphery of the phosphor harder to make up for light loss due to the optics.


I'm no optician, but it seems to me that it should be possible to make lenses that have no perceptible vignetting. I could be wrong.


CJ


----------



## Britax

Today I got my "NOS" HD-144 lenses, and I'm going to make some adaptor rings out of alu.

2 things I noticed when I dismantled the 2 lenses (1 HD8 and 1 HD-144) is:

- How do I get the lenses beyond the back of the HD8 mounting? Using the lower hole (where the wingnut is attached) only make the 144lens go as high as the end of the mounting, not 1-2cm beyond, as is on one of the pictures on page 2.

-How can I extend the "screw" that goes in the lens, holding the wingnut?


Regards

Magne Røyrvik


----------



## 1031




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Britax* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Today I got my "NOS" HD-144 lenses, and I'm going to make some adaptor rings out of alu.
> 
> 2 things I noticed when I dismantled the 2 lenses (1 HD8 and 1 HD-144) is:
> 
> - How do I get the lenses beyond the back of the HD8 mounting? Using the lower hole (where the wingnut is attached) only make the 144lens go as high as the end of the mounting, not 1-2cm beyond, as is on one of the pictures on page 2.
> 
> -How can I extend the "screw" that goes in the lens, holding the wingnut?
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Magne Røyrvik



Hey Britax. Here is how i did that lens mod.. those are sonys pt-xx lenses and HD-145. look those pictures and i think you get that idea...

http://www.dvdplaza.fi/forums/showthread.php?t=38185


----------



## Prehjan

I do hope this does not sound like a stupid question!


But are all HD-144 lenses the same width?


I took the ones off of the NEC 6PG Extra that I got and they are thinner than the marquees original HD-8Bs


...Are all HD144s that way? (Or is it because these are off of a 6 pg? Maybe If I were to get a set off of a bigger machine...they would be the same width as the original maqruee lenses! Probably not though!)


Thanks in advance



Martin


----------



## 1031




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Prehjan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I do hope this does not sound like a stupid question!
> 
> 
> But are all HD-144 lenses the same width?
> 
> 
> I took the ones off of the NEC 6PG Extra that I got and they are thinner than the marquees original HD-8Bs
> 
> 
> ...Are all HD144s that way? (Or is it because these are off of a 6 pg? Maybe If I were to get a set off of a bigger machine...they would be the same width as the original maqruee lenses! Probably not though!)
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> 
> 
> Martin



Yes HD144/145 are thinner and they work ok in place of HD-8


----------



## mp20748




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *1031* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes HD144/145 are thinner and they work ok in place of HD-8



The linked image is from my Marquee 8500Ultra (non LC) with HD-145 color filtered lenses. The lenses came from my NEC 6PG Xtra. The lens adaptors are the same ones mentioned in the start of this thread.


The image is from the 2000 Extron shootout CD. It is, point - shoot - transfer to PC - upload to server - link here. It is 100% untouched.


These lense made a huge difference in sharpness over the stock HD-8's. They were also much brighter, because I had to decrease the contrast with the HD-145 lenses. And if you look at the black in the image, they perform much like LC lenses.

1920x1080p/60hz - HP R707


----------



## Mark_A_W

I told you HD-14x lenses are better










HD-144's are a little better again.


But your linky no worky for me.










Can we have a 1:1 close up of 1080p 72hz please?


My XG LC barely does 1:1 at 1080i72hz, and it's had Benny tweak it, as well as me, so I'm very interested to see your results!


----------



## mp20748












Not sure why that link is not working for you. It works fine for me. I'm uploading it to a site someone recommeded, because I was having the same problem with my Yahoo storage.


I've linked a downrezed image for now (800x600) until I can get this figured out.


I'll try this out later today at 1080p / 72hz full resolution (2592x1952).


----------



## Mark_A_W

Nup, I get a 404 error.


I am on the other side of the world though...


----------



## mp20748

I'll try tinypics again. This is the 800x600 downez:


----------



## mp20748

Here's the full rez image from a direct link:

http://upload.georgeownsme.com/image.php/13991.jpg


----------



## mp20748




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ICan we have a 1:1 close up of 1080p 72hz please?



Attached is an image of the smpte pattern at 1920x1080p 60hz.


I took this a few minutes ago with the light in the room. I'll get back to this later tonight showing this same pattern and at 72hz. It's a bit too much light in the room for now, and that makes it difficult for the camera to focus tightly.



The HD-145 lenses does wonders for that pattern, even while the camera is not at it's best focus. You can actually see the black in between the vert pixel lines on the top left pattern.


----------



## kschmit2

georgeownsme is temporarily unavailable.


----------



## draganm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Prehjan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I do hope this does not sound like a stupid question!
> 
> But are all HD-144 lenses the same width?
> 
> I took the ones off of the NEC 6PG Extra that I got and they are thinner than the marquees original HD-8Bs...Are all HD144s that way?Martin



you're right, this does sound like a stupid question







round objects can not be "thinner" unless your slicing Balogney. However all 144/145 lenses are smaller *diameter* than HD8's







This is why people are making expensive adapter plates.


----------



## Ericglo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kschmit2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> georgeownsme is temporarily unavailable.



Me either. Mike, Clarence suggested imageshack.com awhile back and I have used it religously. It is simple and easy to use. They even give you a link for thumbnails. Clarence also suggested Microsoft resizer to reduce the size of the pics. I take a 2288x1712 (4meg) pic that is around 2 meg in file size. I use the resizer at the same 2288x1712 to reduce the file size down to between 250 to 500k, which will allow hosting on Imageshack. This allows the same large image to be displayed. While there is a loss of detail, you would be surprised at how little it is. This is how I posted the images from that VDC thread back in June that is now gone (I guess it is being moved to the archives).


----------



## GEBrown




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *draganm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> you're right, this does sound like a stupid question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> round objects can not be "thinner" unless your slicing Balogney. However all 144/145 lenses are smaller *diameter* than HD8's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is why people are making expensive adapter plates.



Yeah, it took me a while to figure out "thinner" too.


But, if the lenses have a smaller diameter, are they still larger than the CRT face? or is it like using less of your phophor?


?


----------



## zGman

The 144 lenses have a input diameter of 4.05"; HD8 is 4.8"; 145 is 4.5".


The 144's focus very close to the tube face, (larger screen = closer focus point),

145's focus somewhat further away from the tube face for the same size screen.


So for a larger screen, the combination of larger input diameter and more relaxed

entrance angle makes the 145's a better choice.


That being said, plenty of people are happy with the 144's, the combination of

color filtering and improved focus makes for a much better picture overall.

Actually having accurate reds and greens is something that adds considerably

more realism, and it affects more scenes than some may realize......


Typically, without any other changes, it is possible to increase resolution

approx 20% - say from 720x1280P to 864x1536P, (assuming you're running

an htpc or scaler) and still have a much sharper image.


Point being, although the hd8's may be physically larger, their performance

is considerably less - and in fact is a limiting factor in the overall video chain.


Especially if you have the early hd8revB (with the wingnuts) - absolutely lousy

focus (had them on my '94 Marquee8000)


Hope some of that is helpful....


G


----------



## Javers

Good explaination there G, now I really must get round to fitting my hd145's


----------



## draganm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GEBrown* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> But, if the lenses have a smaller diameter, are they still larger than the CRT face? or is it like using less of your phophor?
> 
> ?



they are smaller, but should still be able to capture the entire tube face due the curvature of the first element. Think of it as a fish-eye camera lense working in reverse.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *zGman* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The 144 lenses have a input diameter of 4.05"; HD8 is 4.8"; 145 is 4.5".The 144's focus very close to the tube face, (larger screen = closer focus point), 145's focus somewhat further away from the tube face for the same size screen.



That is VERY good info and something no-one has posted before. I had always assumed they were the same because the 144/145 use the same mounting flange pattern.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *zGman* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> That being said, plenty of people are happy with the 144's, the combination of color filtering and improved focus makes for a much better picture overall.



i'm pretty sure the 145's come with R+G color filtering as well, although they can come both ways


----------



## Person99




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *draganm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> i'm pretty sure the 145's come with R+G color filtering as well, although they can come both ways



Yes, 145s come both ways. I had a set of CF 145s.


Dave


----------



## Mark_A_W

I've compared both, and thought that 144's had a slight edge, but only just, and I did it again I may think the reverse.


I have HD-144Ns, HD-145Ns and HD-18s. The AC lenses are slightly sharper, but the image has less clarity due to AC washout.


----------



## mp20748

Marquee 8500 Ultra with HD-145 lenses



*1920x1080p @ 60hz*

 

 

 



*1920x108p @ 72hz*


----------



## 1031




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *draganm* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> you're right, this does sound like a stupid question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> round objects can not be "thinner" unless your slicing Balogney. However all 144/145 lenses are smaller *diameter* than HD8's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is why people are making expensive adapter plates.



This is also good english lesson... I remember that i called first that those 144/145 are thinner...







Good to learn something new









Those pictures are really good.. So im gonna keep my hd-145 lenses if i gonna have someday 8"em projector


----------



## Chuchuf

Nice to see that the benefits of converting the HD8 PJ's to the 144/145's are still of interest to the folks here.

I can tell you that gZman his done a LOT of work in this area and that the changes produced are pretty obvious.


Terry


----------



## draganm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *1031* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> This is also good english lesson... I remember that i called first that those 144/145 are thinner...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good to learn something new
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those pictures are really good.. So im gonna keep my hd-145 lenses if i gonna have someday 8"em projector



no reason to wait,an 8" EM machine with nice tubes is the same price as an average DLP, and so much better. The 8500 is so upgradeable that it can actually be fun to improve it, not much you can do to a 1031 though.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chuchuf* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nice to see that the benefits of converting the HD8 PJ's to the 144/145's are still of interest to the folks here.
> 
> I can tell you that gZman his done a LOT of work in this area and that the changes produced are pretty obvious.
> 
> Terry



oh we're always interested, it's just that this has always been a rather complex and expensive process. *First*, it required sending your lenses and mounting plates to a guy to machine custom plastic spacers and press fit it all together = big PITA and not cheap
*Then*, someone machined and a completely new mounting plate out of 1/2" thick ALum. This is great but Alum. prices have gone through the roof. I don't recall what the originl price on these was but as a machinist I would estimate that will material/manuf. costs a set of these plates would be in the $500. range minimum
*finally*, I see from the pics that Rolf Hult posted a VERY nice solution of machined ALum. rings that bolt into the original mounting plates. This is a very nice, neat, and efficent solution. I could see these rings being mass produced for an affordable price. Not sure who makes them though or how much they're charging?


----------



## mp20748

More at 1920x1080p @ 72hz


----------



## laguna_b

Ok, I got my 144s. I had a number of alternatives for mounting:

1) Joustmounts - $219

2) Aluminum machined sleeves - $240 approx.

3) TAP Plastics rings $220

4) TAP Plastics Joust knockoffs in acrylic ~$85

5) PVC Pipe ~$25

6) MDF cut rings ~$7


The requirements for mounting seemed much easier to understand once I had the lenses in hand and could see the problems directly. I was struck by what was a problem that should have a clever and easy solution. After going through a bunch of alternatives listed above, and reading what really elegant solutions others did, I was determined to come up with something simple, cheap and easy.


So, I went to the internet and researched PVC pipe standards. I found that Schedule 40 PVC 5" pipe (5.016" ID 5.56 OD) was amazingly close to what I neededfor a barrel that extended the full length of what had been the original mounting sleeve. I really needed about 4.87" ID and 5.43" OD (approximations). I was SO CLOSE. Then it hit me. Run a blade cut or two the length of the tube and it compresses down to very close to the right size. If the tube had a wall about 1/16" thicker it would be spot on. I think I will make that up with plumbers heavy tape between the lense barrel and the PVC.


The front of the lens mount for HD-8s is wider than the rear by about 1/2". To fill that gap I bought a Schedule 40 5" PVC pipe coupler and sliced off 3/4" rings. This also needed further mods. You slice about 3/8" out of the ring and compress it to fit around the smaller diameter PVC barrel. This material came with raised lines on the outside that had to be filed down to fit.


That brings me to the current state of the project. I placed the lenses in the 1208s/2 last night. Since I did not have the plumbers tape on the rear end and there was a lot of give. I was able to do the full set up but that brings us to the next challenge, the screw stays that hold the lenses in the lens mounts.


Here is my plan for today. The lens screws for these lenses have self tapping screws that work well in plastic. I am going to drill out the PVC pipe to accept these screws. I will mount the lenses with plumbers tape to solidify things. Once it is dark I will try the critical lens focus tasks and see how well the screws hold. The alternative would be to look for tubular washers that match the width of the lens screws and use the original holes. I really don't want to do that.


I will upload pics when I get a chance. Warning: They are NOT pretty. I don't have the proper tools to do the perfectionist job others have shown here. Cutting PVC with a Skillsaw is not very precise. I highly reccomend a band saw to get really clean cuts. Also, the PVC pipe looks dirty. I washed it but stuff gets in deep to the material. So the cuts are rough (though not critical). The most iportant thing is that it works, is easy to do and cheap.


Supplies: 5" PVC is is VERY hard to find unless you know where to look. Everyone stocks 4" and 6". It turns out that 5" is a standard for well casings. Find someone who does wells and you will find the pipe. If you are lucky they will give/sell you 18" so you don't have to buy 20'. The price is usually about $5/ft. The coupling cost me $18.


Some don't like this approach because they lose the mounts for the HD-8s. This means you can't seel them on eBay. Well, many have been trying to sell HD-8s on eBay with no takers. Who wants them? If anyone is going to want them is will be to replace scratched lenses. It is actually easier to sell them without mounts and have them just remove the adjustment screws on the set that is mounted, than remove the 4 hex screws on the mount. So someone can STILL sell them on eBay if you really think there might be a taker.....not likely....it is a market flooded with HD-8 lenses made orphans by HD-144/5 conversions.




NEW!

Well here are the first pics. The original plan had two narrow rings, one 1X and one 2X thickness. I modified that to be a 1X thick sleeve just shy of the original HD-144 mount length (~4.3") with a 3/4" collar made from the 5" PVC coupler. I realised a couple of problems wit that. Mounting the lens set bolts, they need to be just under the surface of the lens mount slot to function and there would be more stability if the thick section ran deeper into the space. So, I recut another section of the couple ~ 1.75" wide.


Fitting brought new headaches of course. The HD-8 mount narrows slightly inside as you get deeper. The lens is widest at the front. This made for an excessively tight fit for a piece that is intended to slide. So I sanded the inner ring near the widest area which helped. I need to do more of that. I want to see how the blue lens focuses tonight. Last night I had problems with it and with the image on the tube. I thought it might be fungus but on inspection it looks really clean. So either the EM focus is off or I need to be really careful with the physical focus.


I have to buy another coupler to make two more wide rings (~1.75") since I used up a lot of the couple already making the 3/4" rings. These should fit better anyway since there is tapering on the coupler that is exacerbating the problem with the fit.


I plan to paint the edges black and probably use plumbers tape between the lens barrel and the inner sleeve to close any clearance issues. I will need to sand a bit more to make rotational travel easier for the main focus.


I said in my first post that it wasn't going to be pretty. If I had a band saw I could make much nicer cuts on the PVC. A belt sander or grinding wheel would have made cleaning the ribs off the outside a lot easier. But it is what is is so far.


----------



## astrobart

hi guys nice work but here is the beginning of my solution for the mounting problem.






a hd145 plus joust adaptor next to a hd8 mount.

As you can see, they both slide the same distance into the projector.





























Nice to know but how can we benefit from this?


If you have a lot of spare's you can experiment so why not glue both parts together?

After the operation the HD8 mount is not usable anymore for hd8 lenses.

The HD144/145 lensmount wil not fit into a joust or 7 inch projector.

In other words the process is inreversable.


what do you need?:


first of all a set of hd8 mounts











You also need a set of these, HD144 or HD145 mounts.











As you can see on the picture these mounts are used on joustmounts.


First I took the hd8 mounts and a saw.

The focus slots had to go to make place for the focus slots as used on the hd145/144 mounts.


I used an normal saw as used in the movie saw









If you aim along the bracing of the HD8 mount you will get a pretty straight cut.






























cutting from top to bottem is easy, but cutting hoizontally is much more diff.


My solution:







this











It cuts like butter































And if you have a deadline:











Not yet finished but almost there.











Next, the hd144/145 mounts:


At this point they will not fit into the hd8 mounts, the bracing is too wide.

I needed 34 MM (millimeters) of free space.

This number is not critical but works.

You can cut more if you like but it is 3.4 cm is enough.

By the way be sure you do not damage the bottem of both lens mounts, you will need an undamaged flat surface.


approx 34 MM











I used masking tape as a guide.





























































































Now you can put the hd144/145 mounts intoo the hd8 mounts.


It is not a thight fit and there is a major gap between both mounts.





















This gap wil be filled with a resin, but i am still waiting for that soo:


To be continued.................



link to the duch tread

http://www.htforum.nl/yabbse/index.php?topic=65529.150 


greetz Bart.


----------



## astrobart

oops ,, posted twice


----------

