[AG-TECH] AG Projector options?

[Ivan R. Judson]

The other trade-off for higher resolution projectors is also space.  You
get smaller pixels if you put the same display geometry up with more
pixels.  This makes the video smaller, fonts smaller, etc.  There is a
sweet spot where a group of people can read the standard font sizes at a
certain distance (which defines pixel size).  After you get to that
sweet spot you need to add more projectors to get more pixels :-).

This is a very cool space to explore, and I'd love to do some literature
searches for what the optimal size is.  I seem to remember 10 arc
radians is the smallest comfortable feature size for a person, which I
have not backsolved to define the appropriate pixel sizes.  It would be
cool to do that too.

--Ivan

..........
Ivan R. Judson .~. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~judson
Futures Laboratory .~.  630 252 0920
Argonne National Laboratory .~. 630 252 6424 Fax
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ag-tech at mcs.anl.gov 
> [mailto:owner-ag-tech at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Robert Olson
> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:59 AM
> To: Osland, CD (Chris) ; 'Markus Buchhorn'
> Cc: Ag-Tech Mailing List (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [AG-TECH] AG Projector options?
> 
> 
> At 12:05 PM 7/18/2002 +0100, Osland, CD (Chris) wrote:
> 
> >An issue that seems to be becoming more important for us is 
> resolution.
> 
> Ah, thanks for making that point. For another data point, 
> when we were out 
> there last year, the Juelich folks had 2 1280x1024 projectors 
> for their 
> node. I was surprised at how much more pixel space that provided - it 
> worked out quite nicely at the time. 3 projectors at that 
> resolution would 
> be great. Unfortunately, as I recall the prices on projectors of that 
> resolution are still quite a bit higher than on the 1024x768 
> projectors.
> 
> --bob
>