Digital Projection reveals TITAN, LIGHTNING and iVision 3D projectors
By Darren Murph 
posted Feb 9th 2009 6:49AM
posted Feb 9th 2009 6:49AM
Like it or not, 3D is making its way into the home -- slowly, but surely. As a followup to the TITAN 1080p-3D at ISE Europe, the company has introduced no fewer than fourteen 3D-capable projectors. Up first is the iVision sx+ 3D and iVision sx+W-3D, both of which are single-chip beamers that weigh in at seven pounds and feature SXGA+ resolutions. The differentiating factor is that the former sports a standard zoom lens, while the latter is equipped with a short throw ratio fixed lens. Moving on, we've got the overloaded TITAN 3D range, which is comprised of eight different DLP-based models that are available with SXGA+ or 1080p resolutions. For 3D applications requiring the highest lumen performance, the LIGHTNING 3D line mimics the TITAN family while upping the lumens to 21,000 and bumping contrast to 4,000:1. No prices are mentioned, but you can tap the read link for more details on the full lot.
Pricing for the 3D displays will start in the $32K range for the single chip projectors up to the $125K range for the LIGHTNING three-chip units. The commercial sector is driving 3D adoption at the moment, but we're hoping for a standardized content delivery method for home viewing.
This is for the super rich who want these badboys in their home theaters. Normal people cannot afford something like this, not even close. I"m still confused, if someone bought one of the 3-D projectors right now, would they still have to connect it to their pc's to get 3-D content from it? I've read up on how to run a 3-D system using projectors and it's very complicated and still not all that great from what I'm told. What this thing has going for it, like a good 3-D projector should, is it's brightness.
From what I have read besides having a system (HDTV, or HD Projector) it's all about the 3D type used that makes the difference. Anaglyph which is the colored glasses method is the 3D that I have come to despise as imho never looks 3D. The Polarized method is the 3D that looks great and really has a 3D effect. The Polarized method is the one you see at disney theme park attractions such as "it's tought to be a bug" while Anaglyph method is what was recently used for Chuck 3D. The main problem is even if a person was to have a display system capable of Polarized 3D there is little to no material available to utilize it. Even recently recorded 3D movies such as journey to the center of the earth which in theaters is played using the polarized method is only available on blu-ray 3D in anaglyph form. That is what has made me decide not to invest in a 3D theater as of now which is a shame since I have a 14 foot HD screen setup and would love to reproduce polarized 3D viewing experiences.
Nolaff-JD -- You're right, content is the most restricting factor for the home cinema 3D market at the moment. There are quite a few methods with which you can view what's available, but both delivery and content are taking a while to materialize. We're all looking forward to the year ahead as the SMPTE workds on developing a standard. Very curious to hear their findings, to say the least.
gr689 - Lumens are certainly important in a 3D space, but there are many variables that make for an immersive and enjoyable 3D experience. If you have a $10,000 projector that creates decent imagery but sucks 200 Kwh every time you fire it up, my personal view is that you're paying less up front due to a lack of engineering precision. Lumens produced per wattage consumed should always be taken into account.