For a while now I have been envious of projected images.
As a photographer, I am generally more concerned with the quality and production of a printed image and that of a monitor – both intimate forms of viewing. The projected image speaks to a larger audience.
Recently, I’ve been experimenting with animation, and along with that, the desire to present my work on a larger scale.
Some recent attempts at showing my work left a sour taste in my files; perhaps the “show by” date had expired, or these extremely finicky, expensive and awkward projectors refused to reveal their overly complicated mechanics whilst I sweated under the expectant gaze of my audience.
So I was pleased to have this unit to play with in an unrushed situation, where I could explore this new world. Words like wide-screen,16:9, theater-style cavorted about my head.
As in all things visual, it’s hard to compare devices unless one examines the output they stand side by side: this is similar to comparing prints made on two different papers and or machines.
If you are familiar with the vast array of monitors available in a store, each displaying different shades of the same color, you will be aware of the problem.
I know my images well, having spent much time in their production, so I’m critical of how they should appear, or more importantly, feel.
For the purposes of this article, my focus here, all puns intentional, was first to review the quality of a projected photographic image, then examine the ease of set-up. The rest, business presentation, games, etc., I shall leave to those more concerned with those areas.
A Wikipedia link at the bottom of the page will give readers more info regarding resolutions and other technical data that they should know.
The first thing I noticed about the Epson EX7210 is its small size, the which belies it’s considerable power. The projector inside is very light and compact. Epson also provides a handy shoulder-bag in which to carry it.
Along with a laptop, this is an elegant and portable device for presenting anything from the threat of global warming, to enthusiastic Alaskanites, meetings of bankers discussing projected bonuses, filthy movies for the neighbors, and my work.
The case is mostly black, simple plastic, and well labeled as to it’s ports and other functions. With the exception of the leveling screws which left a lot to be desired. The screws had fallen off, as the threads were weak. The rear screws did not have a positive action and also threatened to fall off. Not fun to scrabble around on the floor in a darkened auditorium. Perhaps it was that particular model, hopefully corrected on full production.
The unit is WXGA 1280 x 800 at 2,800 lumens, with USB, HDMI, S Video and VGA inputs. Audio connectors are present.
Regarding Lumens, a measure of brightness, a useful guide and article can be accessed here.
http://www.projectorpoint.co.uk/Projector-Brightness-Advice.htm
The above link also provides a simple Q&A to find the lumen rating for whatever your purpose may be. In my case I specified a blacked out room, a 9ft-wide screen, and high-quality images.
According to their recommendations, the above set-up would need a minimum of 2,600 lumens, so this Epson suits my needs, albeit at the lower end of the range.
The resolution is much more of a concern to me, and if I had my druthers, my choice would be HD at 1020i. However, that is also subject to new and evolving technology.
The EX7210 at 1280 is close enough for me to consider as a viable and economical contender for the work I do.
In this case, my laptop has a maximum resolution of 1024 x 768 which is below the maximum this projector allows for. Some interpolation in the projector software makes the necessary conversion.
Of course, I never read manuals, but for those of you who do, the CD contains a link to the online manual. On a side note, I really miss the inclusion of manuals that is now the norm, they provided useful and constructive reading matter for subway rides. I grudgingly glanced at Epson’s “Quick Start Guide” included in the box. I have to credit Epson for including the quick-start guide, as, all too often, the only help one receives initially is a thick mini-book, with instructions on how to plug it in, in fifty different languages, and nothing else of any use. Set-up of these devices should be idiot-proof, as one never knows the conditions that might be encountered on any given project or work assignment.
The first time I set up the projector, I connected via HDMI, and it to my immense satisfaction, the image came on the wall, the laptop conformed; it was a snap.
I then tried using the USB connection. A pop-up informed me that the device had installed correctly. But, my happiness was short-lived, as all I had was a blue screen.
After fiddling about to no avail, I checked in with the computer and saw that an Auto Run was listed in the place where a CD would show, even though I had not loaded the CD. After letting the Auto Run do its thing – about 5 seconds – lo and behold, my desktop appeared on the wall bright and crisp. To test the idiot theory even further, I turned everything off, and back on. This time everything was recognized and communication established.
On to the images.
My first test was in a semi-lit room: some daylight, a ceiling light on, mid-afternoon spring. I ran through about fifty images ranging from very dark subject matter to high-key.
At first glance, the projected images were impressive. The “Menu” set up in the projector has a “Color Mode”. In this menu one can choose the best setting for the subject matter.
The three that most pertain to my work were Theater, Photo, and sRGB. The manual explains that the ambient room light has an impact as to which setting to use. In my initial test, the room was in subdued daylight and the projector six feet from the screen in an attempt to simulate an office-type presentation.
The image projected showed little difference in each of the three settings, some slight increase in the shadow detail was apparent in sRGB mode, the difference was within my tolerance, and also seemed very dependent on the tonal range of the image. The quality of the image itself was more than acceptable, barring the caveat of a side-by-side comparison. The best overall mode was “Photo” but there was very little difference between them.
I’ll briefly mention that the unit has a zoom lens, but the range is so small that I feel it’s useful only to make some fine adjustments once it’s all set up. There is also a simple slider that covers the lens, powers down the lamp, and functions as an audiovisual “mute”; it would be nice if it also paused the laptop as well.
The second test would be in a fully darkened room at a distance of ten feet, with a screen width of 6ft.
I ran the same “mode” test as before; I still felt that “Photo” mode was the best interpretation of my images.
(It occurred to me that for specific images, custom settings could be applied, using the brightness and contrast to tweak every possible detail, but I think that may be going too far).And, perhaps one day, a black and white mode might be advantageous to those photographers concerned with that particular tonal range.
The images in both tests were acceptable – in fact, very nice: a warmth that was not a color cast, and a very good spread between highlight and shadow..
I looked at sharpness and given that the native resolution has an influence, as does the maximum native resolution of the laptop or tower, the texture of the screen, any real scientific evaluation would not be possible. So, I was relieved to be constrained and make a more empirical assessment.
As I’m used to looking at 1920 x 1200 on my computer, I felt there was a little softness, but this is may also be dependent on the type of image being projected. My work recently has a greater softness than in the past, and the projected image did not degrade in any manner that caused concern.
I projected an image that contained type, and could see no fringing, or bleed. The image was sharp side to side, top to bottom.
There are several software functions that will assist in correcting key-stoning, some of which are automatic, and sense the incorrect orientation of the projector. But I think it’s always best to have the device centered and perpendicular to the screen.
One last point; my tests, in the dark room, were conducted against a plain white wall. I did not use a screen designed for that purpose; I suspect that is another story all together. Viewing angles and “fabric gain” rear their heads.
The issue of 16: 9 versus 3: 4 and all the other proportions is still in flux, so I will leave that aside; WXGA gives a proportion of 16 x 10.
All in all, my only beef was the leveling screws; other than that, the unit performed beautifully.