DLP vs LCD projection

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:50:00 GMT, blou <blou26@hotmail.com> wrote:

>What'is the best of this technology Between DLP & LCD porjection for HDTV.
>
>Which is the best?
>
>LG LCD projection 44" MODEL: RU-44/52SZ80L
>
>And
>
>Samsung DLP TV HLN4365W43 Wide Screen HDTV Monitor

DLP rules.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I'm interested in this question too--but, I think the better
question is which is the more survivable, i.e., more rugged,
less prone to breakdown (of parts and pixels!) in 2-7 years,
etc. ...tonyC


"blou" <blou26@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns957AC9C56231Chouhotmailcom@205.237.233.52...
> What'is the best of this technology Between DLP & LCD
porjection for HDTV.
>
> Which is the best?
>
> LG LCD projection 44" MODEL: RU-44/52SZ80L
>
> And
>
> Samsung DLP TV HLN4365W43 Wide Screen HDTV Monitor
>
> Thanks

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"best" is subjective and could be based on many factors: price,
durability, maintence cost, picture quality, etc...

In terms of picture quality, it really varies from model to model. I
find the black levels too weak on most LCD displays to be acceptable.
The Sony Grant Wega's and a few Pansonic models (sorry, I don't
remember the model I was looking at) are the only exceptions I seen to
this and they are far from perfect.

Current DLP technology offers better contrast (brightness). When
compared to CRT rp and CRT direct-view models DLP technology is still
considered to have weaker blacks (although not as bad as LCD to my
eyes).

Longitivity wise, both are excellent choices, however LCD is designed
to be zero maintence technology (this doesn't account for defect),
while DLP sets require the bulb to be changed out every 6000 hours,
which will be somewhere between 4-10 years for most consumers. So as
your friends CRT rear-projection set is wearing out, you're DLP set
will get a $400 bulb replacement and will be good as new.









blou <blou26@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns957AC9C56231Chouhotmailcom@205.237.233.52>...
> What'is the best of this technology Between DLP & LCD porjection for HDTV.
>
> Which is the best?
>
> LG LCD projection 44" MODEL: RU-44/52SZ80L
>
> And
>
> Samsung DLP TV HLN4365W43 Wide Screen HDTV Monitor
>
> Thanks

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 21:05:22 -0400, "Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com>
wrote:

>> The ultimate projector is of course the 3 chip DLP. It has no moving
>parts
>> like the LCD, and so has great color reproduction. It also has great
>> contrast. It also has a fast response time, along with a high price tag,
>> which is unfortunate. Apparently the yields on DLP chips isn't very good
>> compared to LCD panels.
>
>Simply untrue. Yields are, according to several manufacturers, exceeding
>LCD, and are expected to improve even more. LCOS is another matter.

Isn't there only a single manufacturer of DLP chips?

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Mack McKinnon" <MckinnonRemoveThis@tvadmanDeleteThisAsWell.com> wrote in
message news:lYk9d.3270$iC4.130@fe2.texas.rr.com...
>
> Not sure how the LCD sets are going > to "wear out" in contrast to the
> DLP's. The LCD's don't have any moving parts while the LCD's have that
> color wheel, so you would think it might be
> the other way around.

There is some evidence that the LCD panels will shift or change slightly in
color as they age.

Ed

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:02vbm096vtf92f0ml8ocntnao41vm0j5to@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 21:05:22 -0400, "Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> The ultimate projector is of course the 3 chip DLP. It has no moving
> >parts
> >> like the LCD, and so has great color reproduction. It also has great
> >> contrast. It also has a fast response time, along with a high price
tag,
> >> which is unfortunate. Apparently the yields on DLP chips isn't very
good
> >> compared to LCD panels.
> >
> >Simply untrue. Yields are, according to several manufacturers, exceeding
> >LCD, and are expected to improve even more. LCOS is another matter.
>
> Isn't there only a single manufacturer of DLP chips?

I should have said manufacturers of sets that are end product. Anything
with a DLP chip is made by TI. Each manufacturer does their own testing
under varying conditions, some more than others. Some of the testing on
long term reliability has been pretty extensive. Some manufacturers just
use the product supplied from TI with little or no testing I am sure. Of
course, the info that we get is several generations removed from the actual
sources, and comes through techs and training reps for the manufacturers of
the sets. It seems pretty clear, however, that they are very pleased with
what they are seeing on the DLP devices and most are moving in that
direction and away from LCD for projection applications.

Leonard

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:30:36 -0400, "Leonard Caillouet"
<nospam@noway.com> wrote:

>It seems pretty clear, however, that they are very pleased with
>what they are seeing on the DLP devices and most are moving in that
>direction and away from LCD for projection applications.

Like I said. DLP rules. 8)

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"John Doe" <me@here.com> wrote in message
news:ckhaa3$ut4$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
> The yields are better with DLP than LCD, but TVs that have 3 LCD panels
cost
> the same as a TV with 1 DLP chip?

There is one maker of DLP chips. LCD is a mature technology. Yeilds and
reliability will be significant factors in the transition away from LCD to
DLP. Ask any of the manufacturers what they plan to do. They all say the
same thing.

> > The single motor and color wheel, if it is built well, can be much less
of
> > a
> > problem than the effects of heat on LCD panels when oils and dust from
the
> > air attach themselves to a panel with intense light passing through the
> > panel. Both are very reliable technologies, but the life of the DLP is
> > expected to be considerably longer, primarily due to heat.
>
> Says who? The failure of the light engine is not likely to be a problem
> with either technology.

Well, I have seen many failures of LCD panels. They are sensitive to heat
and UV, particularly the blue panels. According to tech reps at Hitachi and
Mitsubishi, the testing of DLP chips leads them to believe that they will
have much longer life.


> Yes I know what inherent means. Using 3 pure non filtered primary colors
to
> generate color is better than using color approximations through a
filtered
> color wheel.

Non filtered? Where do you get that? How do you think the colors are
produced, phosphors? The fact is that color is not going to be a
significant decision factor between the two technologies. Resolution will.
Reliability will.

> Spin them as fast as you want, the color is still inferior for a 1 chip
DLP
> projector.

Simply not true. Color purity has been a problem with various applications
of both LCD and DLP, and color representation varies as well, but it is not
a matter of problems inherent in DLP vs LCD.

> > And the better DLP sets are clearly superior to the Sony LCD based sets.
> What DLP set do you mean? I haven't seen a single 1 chip DLP TV that I
> would take over a Sony XBR LCD projecter.

The new Optoma and Mitsubishi sets for examples.

> > DLP also inherently allows for production of much higher resolution
> > devices
> > in smaller packages.
>
> Here you are factually wrong. Current mainstream LCD is higher resolution
> than DLP.

No, the inherent advantage is with DLP. Do your homework. Just look at the
pix. You can see the screen door effect much more clearly on LCD sets.

> > Simply untrue. Yields are, according to several manufacturers,
exceeding
> > LCD, and are expected to improve even more. LCOS is another matter.
>
> So again, you claim something that the price of TVs don't reflect. LCD
TVs
> have 3 LCD panels to equivalently price 1 chip DLP.

See above. The price of sets depends on mush more than yields.

Leonard

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Leonard Caillouet" <nospam@noway.com> wrote in message
news:vGYad.77533$yp.66750@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>
> "John Doe" <me@here.com> wrote in message
> news:ckhaa3$ut4$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
>> The yields are better with DLP than LCD, but TVs that have 3 LCD panels
> cost
>> the same as a TV with 1 DLP chip?
>
> There is one maker of DLP chips. LCD is a mature technology. Yeilds and
> reliability will be significant factors in the transition away from LCD to
> DLP. Ask any of the manufacturers what they plan to do. They all say the
> same thing.
>
>> > The single motor and color wheel, if it is built well, can be much less
> of
>> > a
>> > problem than the effects of heat on LCD panels when oils and dust from
> the
>> > air attach themselves to a panel with intense light passing through the
>> > panel. Both are very reliable technologies, but the life of the DLP is
>> > expected to be considerably longer, primarily due to heat.
>>
>> Says who? The failure of the light engine is not likely to be a problem
>> with either technology.
>
> Well, I have seen many failures of LCD panels. They are sensitive to heat
> and UV, particularly the blue panels. According to tech reps at Hitachi
> and
> Mitsubishi, the testing of DLP chips leads them to believe that they will
> have much longer life.
>
>
>> Yes I know what inherent means. Using 3 pure non filtered primary colors
> to
>> generate color is better than using color approximations through a
> filtered
>> color wheel.
>
> Non filtered? Where do you get that? How do you think the colors are
> produced, phosphors? The fact is that color is not going to be a
> significant decision factor between the two technologies. Resolution
> will.
> Reliability will.

Wrong
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/co [...] le/1645.6/
This article has 1 idiot trying to argue the same thing you are.
He shows two closeup images of a LCD and DLP projector. Notice that there
are purple edges to the start button. I don't suppose you want to hear that
there are NO purple elements to this bitmap. The purple fringes are caused
by the inferior DLP color reproduction. I suspect the orange rendered at
the top right is also supposed to be yellow green.

As for screen door effect, I would take the image on the left any day.

Counting also seems to be a problem for you. Mainstream LCD has 1386 x 788
resolution, DLP has 1280 x 720 resolution. 1092168 pixels is more than
921600 pixels. Sorry.

>> Spin them as fast as you want, the color is still inferior for a 1 chip
> DLP
>> projector.
>
> Simply not true. Color purity has been a problem with various
> applications
> of both LCD and DLP, and color representation varies as well, but it is
> not
> a matter of problems inherent in DLP vs LCD.
>
>> > And the better DLP sets are clearly superior to the Sony LCD based
>> > sets.
>> What DLP set do you mean? I haven't seen a single 1 chip DLP TV that I
>> would take over a Sony XBR LCD projecter.
>
> The new Optoma and Mitsubishi sets for examples.
>
>> > DLP also inherently allows for production of much higher resolution
>> > devices
>> > in smaller packages.
>>
>> Here you are factually wrong. Current mainstream LCD is higher
>> resolution
>> than DLP.
>
> No, the inherent advantage is with DLP. Do your homework. Just look at
> the
> pix. You can see the screen door effect much more clearly on LCD sets.
>
>> > Simply untrue. Yields are, according to several manufacturers,
> exceeding
>> > LCD, and are expected to improve even more. LCOS is another matter.
>>
>> So again, you claim something that the price of TVs don't reflect. LCD
> TVs
>> have 3 LCD panels to equivalently price 1 chip DLP.
>
> See above. The price of sets depends on mush more than yields.
>
> Leonard
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"John Doe" <me@here.com> wrote in message
news:ckjcc2$sac$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
> > Non filtered? Where do you get that? How do you think the colors are
> > produced, phosphors? The fact is that color is not going to be a
> > significant decision factor between the two technologies. Resolution
> > will.
> > Reliability will.
>
> Wrong
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/co [...] le/1645.6/
> This article has 1 idiot trying to argue the same thing you are.
> He shows two closeup images of a LCD and DLP projector. Notice that there
> are purple edges to the start button. I don't suppose you want to hear
that
> there are NO purple elements to this bitmap. The purple fringes are
caused
> by the inferior DLP color reproduction. I suspect the orange rendered at
> the top right is also supposed to be yellow green.
>
> As for screen door effect, I would take the image on the left any day.

Not wrong at all. You have obviously not worked on many LCD units. No
prism provides discrete and perfect separation of colors. There are indeed
filters and polarizing lenses in a three-panel LCD unit. The link you site
does not change this fact. Would you like the part numbers from a common
LCD projector for the filters?

> Counting also seems to be a problem for you. Mainstream LCD has 1386 x
788
> resolution, DLP has 1280 x 720 resolution. 1092168 pixels is more than
> 921600 pixels. Sorry.

I did not say that the resolution is higher in current production devices, I
said DLP inherently has an advantage. There will be 1080 chips out next
year according to several manufacturers. Also, I'd take a 720 native
display over one that has to rescale 720 to 768 anyday, given all else
equal.

> >> Spin them as fast as you want, the color is still inferior for a 1 chip
> > DLP
> >> projector.

That is like saying every car with a V8 is better than every car with a V6.
Time will show that LCDs and CRTs will be displaced by LCD for several
reasons. You can "spin" all you want, but this is the trend and virtually
every manufacturer is betting the same way.

Leonard

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

> Time will show that LCDs and CRTs will be displaced by LCD for several
> reasons. You can "spin" all you want, but this is the trend and virtually
> every manufacturer is betting the same way.
>
> Leonard

Leonard.

I don't think I would count LCOS technology out of the running just yet.
JVC has put a
3 chip LCOS rear projector on the market that is priced competetively with
DLP and LCD RP sets. It has been getting favorable tratment on AVSFORUM,
particularly for a first generation set.

Today DLP rules, no question. But I would prefer a 3 chip solution to the
DLP spinning wheel. In any event, having purchased a mits CRT RP earlier
this year I won't have to make that decision for another 5 years or so when
I suspect things will look very different from what they do they do today.

Good commentary on the DLP vs LCD question. Always enjoy reading
observations from someone s battling away down in the trenches every day.

Ed

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:4wsbd.47134$tU4.16651@okepread06...
>
> "Ed T" <ed.wilson@acsalaskanospam.net> wrote in message
> news:416dd3d2@news.acsalaska.net...
> > > Time will show that LCDs and CRTs will be displaced by
LCD for several
> > > reasons. You can "spin" all you want, but this is the
trend and
> virtually
> > > every manufacturer is betting the same way.
> > >
> > > Leonard
> >
> > Leonard.
> >
> > I don't think I would count LCOS technology out of the
running just yet.
> > JVC has put a
> > 3 chip LCOS rear projector on the market that is priced
competetively with
> > DLP and LCD RP sets. It has been getting favorable
tratment on AVSFORUM,
> > particularly for a first generation set.
> >
> > Today DLP rules, no question. But I would prefer a 3
chip solution to the
> > DLP spinning wheel. In any event, having purchased a
mits CRT RP earlier
> > this year I won't have to make that decision for another
5 years or so
> when
> > I suspect things will look very different from what they
do they do today.
> >
> > Good commentary on the DLP vs LCD question. Always
enjoy reading
> > observations from someone s battling away down in the
trenches every day.
> >
> > Ed
>
> I don't count LCOS out at all. At this point the problem
is reportedly that
> the manufacturing yields are much lower than they had
hoped. There are also
> several other related technologies that are being
researched and developed.
> Three chip solutions have advantages, no doubt. There are
problems that
> have to be dealt with, however, such as the more complex
optical path, which
> makes for a more expensive product.
>
> I suspect your CRT based set will last longer than 5
years, unless you are
> very unlucky or use is severely. They are certainly the
best value
> currently and I think your decision was a wise one. The
best DLP and LCD
> sets are very good, but still much more $$ than the CRT
based products.
>
> I have reservations about the color wheels. There have
been some lousy
> applications of this method already. Having seen many LCD
projectors with
> bad filters, dirty light paths, and problems in panels
that are very
> expensive to repair, however, I am less confident in
three-chip applications
> than others. Don't forget that even a little misalignment
of the panels in
> a three chip system can lead to annoying misconvergence.
Compared to CRT
> based sets it is minor and less common, but once you see
it over the whole
> screen it is very annoying. I have received units from
repair at
> manufacturers service centers that I had to re-align
myself. I don't mean
> to scare people off of 3-chip solutions nor LCD in
general. I just point
> out that the technology, like any other, is not free of
issues.
>
> Leonard
>
> Leonard

I have been looking at some customer reviews of the Samsung
HLP4663W - 46" DLP set and find there are very many
complaints relating to the bulb. After days or several
weeks, many sets when turned on, cycle to standby several
times without the bulb firing, then turn off. This sounds
serious to me--I haven't checked other models or sizes but
now I hesitate to look further. Anyone familiar with this
for Sammys or DLP in general? ...tonyC

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:N8Dbd.1152$HG3.83@lakeread04...
>
> "Anthony Cerrato" <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote in
message
> news:f%wbd.6367$Fe6.1857478@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
>
> > I have been looking at some customer reviews of the
Samsung
> > HLP4663W - 46" DLP set and find there are very many
> > complaints relating to the bulb. After days or several
> > weeks, many sets when turned on, cycle to standby
several
> > times without the bulb firing, then turn off. This
sounds
> > serious to me--I haven't checked other models or sizes
but
> > now I hesitate to look further. Anyone familiar with
this
> > for Sammys or DLP in general? ...tonyC
>
> The problem is not unique to DLP. Several manufacturers
have had problems
> with lamps and lamp ballasts, including Sony, Samsung, and
Hitachi. Sony's
> problems were rather limited and said to be due to the
lamp source, Philips.
> There are two sources for most of the lamps, Philips and
Osram. I can't
> tell you much about the Samsung problems other than I
checked on the
> availability for a lamp for a client recently and found it
was out of stock
> with Samsung. Frankly, I don't think any of the problems
have been that
> extensive, but my experience with the Samsung is very
limited and based on
> what I hear from other techs. It seems like most of their
problems have
> been with inventories being low because they are used up
in production.
>
> Leonard

Thanks Leonard. Yes, I see what you mean--just found a few
more complaints on other sets/models/set types...a little
disconcerting. I am starting to wonder if _any_ of this tech
is really "ready for prime time." Will continue to
explore--and possibly wait at least one more year (tho it's
getting harder and harder to resist! ) ) ...tonyC

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:1g0cd.30$si.2@lakeread04...
>
> "Anthony Cerrato" <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote in
message
> news:fJRbd.12155$Fe6.5205789@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> >
> > "Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in message
> > news:N8Dbd.1152$HG3.83@lakeread04...
> > >
> > > "Anthony Cerrato" <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote in
> > message
> > > news:f%wbd.6367$Fe6.1857478@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > >
> > > > I have been looking at some customer reviews of the
> > Samsung
> > > > HLP4663W - 46" DLP set and find there are very many
> > > > complaints relating to the bulb. After days or
several
> > > > weeks, many sets when turned on, cycle to standby
> > several
> > > > times without the bulb firing, then turn off. This
> > sounds
> > > > serious to me--I haven't checked other models or
sizes
> > but
> > > > now I hesitate to look further. Anyone familiar with
> > this
> > > > for Sammys or DLP in general? ...tonyC
> > >
> > > The problem is not unique to DLP. Several
manufacturers
> > have had problems
> > > with lamps and lamp ballasts, including Sony, Samsung,
and
> > Hitachi. Sony's
> > > problems were rather limited and said to be due to the
> > lamp source, Philips.
> > > There are two sources for most of the lamps, Philips
and
> > Osram. I can't
> > > tell you much about the Samsung problems other than I
> > checked on the
> > > availability for a lamp for a client recently and
found it
> > was out of stock
> > > with Samsung. Frankly, I don't think any of the
problems
> > have been that
> > > extensive, but my experience with the Samsung is very
> > limited and based on
> > > what I hear from other techs. It seems like most of
their
> > problems have
> > > been with inventories being low because they are used
up
> > in production.
> > >
> > > Leonard
> >
> > Thanks Leonard. Yes, I see what you mean--just found a
few
> > more complaints on other sets/models/set types...a
little
> > disconcerting. I am starting to wonder if _any_ of this
tech
> > is really "ready for prime time." Will continue to
> > explore--and possibly wait at least one more year (tho
it's
> > getting harder and harder to resist! ) )
....tonyC
>
> I would not be too concerned about it. I suspect the
problems with lamps
> and ballasts will be less common than convergence amp
failures in CRT based
> RPTV or purity issues in large direct view CRTs. LCD
systems have been
> around for a while and we see some with problems, and
there have been a few
> patterns of problems, but overall, I think both LCD and
DLP projection
> systems will be somewhat more reliable than CRT based
technologies.
>
> Leonard

Good points Leonard. I've always been a risk taker
anyway--tho only rarely on stuff this expensive. One other
thing worries me though, which you will think really silly.
I do have a very serious problem with dust in this apt. -- I
mean really serious! Thus I wonder 'bout light transmissive
formats a bit--even my conventional pristine glass-faced
Sony CRT is hard to keep clean, tho, to date, internally it
seems to have held up. I'm not so certain about these other
formats however. Well, not much can be done about this
problem I guess except to move to a cleaner neighborhood.
(unlikely tho.) Thanks again, ...tonyC

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Anthony Cerrato" <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:7Iecd.24386$Fe6.9380870@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...

> Good points Leonard. I've always been a risk taker
> anyway--tho only rarely on stuff this expensive. One other
> thing worries me though, which you will think really silly.
> I do have a very serious problem with dust in this apt. -- I
> mean really serious! Thus I wonder 'bout light transmissive
> formats a bit--even my conventional pristine glass-faced
> Sony CRT is hard to keep clean, tho, to date, internally it
> seems to have held up. I'm not so certain about these other
> formats however. Well, not much can be done about this
> problem I guess except to move to a cleaner neighborhood.
> (unlikely tho.) Thanks again, ...tonyC

This could be a concern. None of the sets that I have seen have adequate
filtering, IMO. I am probably more bothered by it than need to be, but I
just hate to see dirty lenses. The fact is that unless the dust is really
severe and greasy, like in a rest or bar, it likely won't present much of a
problem. Now I have seen some pretty nasty LCDs come out of bars and
restaurants, and if the LCDs get really dirty they can be damaged by the
heat. We have seen many bad panels in these cases, especially blue ones.
With the transmissive system, any light that you block at the panel causes
heating. Once you have a bad spot it often grows.

One of the things I like about the DLP system is that the device itself is
reported to be very durable. I was on the phone with a vendor discussing
cleaning them recently and he said they just spray them off and wipe them
with a swab!?! I couldn't believe it, but he said they are mostly hard to
damage. You can do the same with LCD panels but you have to be very careful
with them.

IIWY, I'd pick a set that the filters are easy to get to and clean. Some
are pretty silly, like the new Mits DLPs with the filter cover in the back.
If it is installed in a cabinet you can't get to it. They put the lamp
access in the front, but not the filter.

Leonard

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:_Nucd.45155$hj.39962@fed1read07...
>
> "Anthony Cerrato" <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote in
message
> news:7Iecd.24386$Fe6.9380870@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
>
> > Good points Leonard. I've always been a risk taker
> > anyway--tho only rarely on stuff this expensive. One
other
> > thing worries me though, which you will think really
silly.
> > I do have a very serious problem with dust in this
apt. -- I
> > mean really serious! Thus I wonder 'bout light
transmissive
> > formats a bit--even my conventional pristine glass-faced
> > Sony CRT is hard to keep clean, tho, to date, internally
it
> > seems to have held up. I'm not so certain about these
other
> > formats however. Well, not much can be done about this
> > problem I guess except to move to a cleaner
neighborhood.
> > (unlikely tho.) Thanks again, ...tonyC
>
> This could be a concern. None of the sets that I have
seen have adequate
> filtering, IMO. I am probably more bothered by it than
need to be, but I
> just hate to see dirty lenses. The fact is that unless
the dust is really
> severe and greasy, like in a rest or bar, it likely won't
present much of a
> problem. Now I have seen some pretty nasty LCDs come out
of bars and
> restaurants, and if the LCDs get really dirty they can be
damaged by the
> heat. We have seen many bad panels in these cases,
especially blue ones.
> With the transmissive system, any light that you block at
the panel causes
> heating. Once you have a bad spot it often grows.
>
> One of the things I like about the DLP system is that the
device itself is
> reported to be very durable. I was on the phone with a
vendor discussing
> cleaning them recently and he said they just spray them
off and wipe them
> with a swab!?! I couldn't believe it, but he said they
are mostly hard to
> damage. You can do the same with LCD panels but you have
to be very careful
> with them.
>
> IIWY, I'd pick a set that the filters are easy to get to
and clean. Some
> are pretty silly, like the new Mits DLPs with the filter
cover in the back.
> If it is installed in a cabinet you can't get to it. They
put the lamp
> access in the front, but not the filter.
>
> Leonard

Good to know--I didn't even realize there _were_ servicable
filters in these things...figured they depended on just
tight frame closure and maybe whatever they do on
conventional CRT sets, like a small air vent covered with
cloth or sumptin', i.e. essentially, not user servicable.
Hmmm...now I am a bit more
worried...and my dust etc is very greasy due to lack of
stove vent/filter in kitchen. Oh well, maybe I won't be
keeping it that long anyway...if only conventional HD-CRTs
were available in a non-bulky/heavy set I'd definitely go
that way. ...tonyC