One interesting fact about lanugage, offtopic a bit buy some of you might be interested:
Google spent sufficient amount of money to prohibit thesaurus/dictionary publishers to define:
to google - to search for something on the internet
Google has become so popular, that more people now use google it rather than search it on the internet, with that it has become a “common” word. And common words are not easy to copyright. So Google spent a lot of money to prohibit that “google it” gets published official definition, because from that moment on they potentially lose the full right to the name.
The reason for mentioning that is to show that you need to understand the language and be aware of its use. And adapt.
Yet when you look at sites like https://www.projectorcentral.com/ which is probably the largest independent resource on projectors (and it does not sell projectors so there is no marketing doublespeak), you won’t see the word ‘native’ used unless it specifically refers to a fixed physical pixel array.
I find it disappointing that you continue to attack the character of those passing on technical information in a specifically Technical forum, by calling them ignorant on the rest of the world.
Pixel shifting projectors aren’t terrible, but they just aren’t the same as a native resolution projector, not just in image quality but functionality as well (because image processing for pixel shifting is more demanding). For instance the DLPC3436 chipset driving the DLP230NP DMD only supports vertical keystoning - it does not support 4 corner correction and never will (the 4 corner correction in the PPM is done by changing the display rendering in the Android OS).
It is pretty clear that ‘native’ is a specific term that Philips is not using appropriately.
Why should it be okay for a technical company like Philips to exploit the inexperience of average people just to sell more projectors?
If I can read the documentation correctly I think you are in error, here. The DLPC3439 that drives the native 1080p .47 DMD is a six years old device that actually has less features than last year’s -36. It doesn’t seem to do keystone at all and you need two of them plus whatever device you need for geometry correction.
[quote]I find it disappointing that you continue to attack the character of those passing on technical information in a specifically Technical forum, by calling them ignorant on the rest of the world.
[/quote]
Dear Sefton,
With all due respect, I am calling you ignorant of the rest of the world, ignorant meaning that you continue to ignore simple truth that people are using Native resolution as they are using it. It is very nice that you share knowledge and I very much appreciate that.
That does not give you the right to call out Philips to be misleading to people about resolution of the product. Because they are not. Accept the fact that Native resolution is used among the average buyer as it is used - not the way you use it. I am very sorry that the rest of the world is ignorant of the technical knowledge you and others have, and don’t care for it. They just want to know number of pixels their projector will show on the screen, not how. You see, we are also ignorant, us, the rest of the world
I gave you an example, you did not answer to, so please do now:
lets assume Philips is not using an LCD element, but sci-fi bladerunner laser beam that produces a picture od 1080p on the wall - what would you say is the native resolution of that projector. And don’t bullshit about this not having a native resolution because it is not an LCD element or a matrix producing the end result. “Laser 1080p”? What if it was not lasers but space dust? Or mermaids?
Native 1080p it is. With pixel shifting. using quarter LCD element; or with space dust - I’m not sure have not opened mine. Still a Native 1080p. Native because this is the amount of unique pixels you by default see. If you want to show some other resolution it will be resampled using software to something that us presenting non-native resolution ie. 640x480 by using multiple pixels to show the same image. If you send in a 4k signal it will be resampled to meet this projectors native 1080p resolution.
I truly wish mine is done with space dust now. Wait and see.
p.s. as you see I have no problem with people passing technical information in a technical forum - on the contrary i appreciate it all. Only thing I am fighting for is for the people to have the right to continue using words native 1080p for what they are using it. and the topic is Is 1080p native - yes it is from our point of view.
Please continue sharing technical knowledge.
To make things clearer:
Native resolution of the DMD used is 960x540
Native resolution of the projector is 1920x1080
Thanks for all guys in this thread. It was interested to go deep in DLP solutions and read different opinions.
I still want to take a look to pictures with and without pixel shifting technology, but from tech side it is true native 1080p for me.
This native 1080p question started (related) far in the past. If we trace back, is about there is a thread asking philips if the chip or projector is using "pixel shifting’. Philips has answer the question with a firm “No”. But, in the current understanding it is a pixel shifting.
In my opinion, to put it simple I will say:
Native 1080p = Non pixel shifting 1080p
1080p = does not care about technology 1080p
Let put all technical stuff aside, I do think that Philips has to make their advertisement without using term that is questionable. In my opinion will be using “1080p” in stead of “native 1080p”. Besides, with their very firm reply long long time ago, I really think and hope Philips should have amend us (who believe in non-pixel-shifting is used), maybe give a free warranty extend, or give something as apology. That unprofessional advertisement and reply has seriously cause people fighting for.
If I put TI and Philips into a similar soap drama, this is like TI (as a distributor) sell Philips sugar then Philips has marketed it as brown sugar. They are all sweet …We know… But is this really allowed?
From technical, cost and feasibility perspective, if I remember there was a reply from Philips mentioning if there are using a non pixel shifting chip the battery cannot even last for more 20 minutes and blah blah. To me this is a bullshit statement which is very very unprofessional.If battery last very short then why not increase battery capacity. Then Philips will also say battery is heavier with larger capacity make the machine heavier (not portable).
In my interpretation/imagination, I will think that in the early beginning PicoPix Max was using a real “native” (I mean not pixel shifting here), but because of the issue with battery usage, they are force to use a more power saving chip. which again I interpreted as they are sacrificing “native” for the other 2 points (portable and long battery usage). I am so sorry but Philips you make me feel that what I am thinking is the real, and especially if it is you are very unprofessional for keep track of your product change over the time.
Until now there is nothing to really prove Philips is wrong/false advertisement (as far as my understanding there is not clear and strict standard in market for 1080p and its variant). But, if what I said earlier the “sugar” example is correct I think this is a reputation related topic.
This is the easiest way to satisfied me in this moment. As we (or maybe some of us ) all understand that it is super hard to have all 3 feature in (non-pixel shifting + portable + long battery life).
if you have a projector that projects an image, that has unique 1920x1080p pixels and you do not know what is inside a projector producing this - could be mermaids, magic dust, little chinese guys, little croatian guys, my grandma - we do not care about it.
What is a native resolution of that said projector?
Some will say that you use only resolution, but you cannot use native with it - why not?
Sorry is my opinion regarding the term of native 1080p, I meant the non-pixel shifting which has directly answered by Philips. Regarding if it is native or not I don’t have any right to say as i mentioned there is no strict standard has defined for “native” vs “non-native”. I have to emphasize that the most suitable term shall be just “1080p”. It is easy accessible for us to get all those information from TI, but none seem to have mentioned “native”. As a result, I am believing in my point that Philips should never over advertising by using “native 1080p”. It is really like putting a “brown” in front of sugar when they selling that.
That’s extremely unlikely. There are no .23" or 0.31" DLP devices not using pixel shifting for 1080p. Using a .47" chip would have meant an entirely different optical engine, different optics, and a completely different board.
I can’t believe they could have managed to do this without significant changes to the external form factor.
That is exactly why I am interested to see. And what I have believed. But, not in the fact. Upon joining start up project we are investing to “new technology”, right?
No because Native cannot be related to the actual light source element. Go and research laser pico projectors, who also have a native resolution, even though most have only three laser beams as the light source. so from that point native resolution should be what? 1? 3? Or you want to say it has no Native resolution? And yet you get 1920x1080 from that laser projector. just putting a 1080p says nothing because they use it to say it supports 1080p input. You can invent synonyms for Native and call it Visible 1080p, Actual 1080p, Projects 1080p but thats just same sh**t as Native.
I agree you can use Native resolution of the DMD is 540p, but Native resolution of the projector is 1080p. So if you want to specify both be my guest, but don’t diminish one because of the other.
Which clearing mentioned 3 different type of 4K. I believe that is close enough to our 1080p discussion.
Also emphasize that I am not in the field, I am just a normal buyer. To be honest I concern not the technical like I have mentioned every times. To me PicoPix Max is 1080p. What I concern here is how can the advertisement create a different effect to (at least some buyer) with term that is not specify. If I have do enough research, I think I can make everything happen. haha
But joke aside, if I could ask you “Native resolution of the DMD is 540p” is this something that can be seen (visible like what you use) by our eyes? Why you called that chip resolution is 540p when you should see 1080p? But why you call a projector 1080p as native when it is using native resolution 540p chip? In your logic you should call them all according to what is visible? Don’t get me wrong, but from what you have mention “native” = “visible”. Even thought I have never see any of this definition. So I don’t get the part that you admitted the chip is native 540p resolution. In your logic, isn’t everything rely on number or pixel our bare eyes see?
I believe in there is difference between mentioning native vs not. But unfortunately is not the same as what you believe and insist. But I don’t believe that the word is there just for fun. It is NOT FUN now when everyone is spending time to check. Once more I want emphasize that this confusion is made by Philips, not me. Why all showed here(Projectors. Discover the full range | Philips) never mentioned “native 720p” but only this PicoPix Max? Obviously is something making such a big company to use that term.
My point with the chip and and native is very simple.
If someone wants to stress out that internally projector is using a DMD chip with a Native 540p they are welcome to do it. You cannot actually see this with your eyes because the chip is rather small and is too bright to look into it. You are anyway not supposed to look into the chip to watch a movie, but to the projection screen - where resolution is 1080p.
So at the same time you cannot deny Philips to use Native 1080p to describe the native resolution projector is displaying.
That is why I ask you to define me a native resolution of a projector you do not know internal workings but know the final result. And Philips is talking about that. Their marketing material is not for tech buffs but for your non technical friends who do not care about how it came to be.
So, if as an end result there is a primary resolution of 1080p achieved we have this: way the projection is achieved == projection projector supports Native 540p DPD + pixel shifting == Native 1080p projection bladerunner laser engine == Native 1080p projection Native 1080p DPD == Native 1080p projection Native 1080p DPD + pixel shifting == Native 4K projection star dust engine == Native 1080p projection mermaid engine == Native 1080p projection steam engine == Native 1080p projection
When you come to the shop and want to buy a Native 1080p the merchant is not going to explain to you about internal workings but provide all projectors that present the image of 1080p. Most of the merchant will be ignorant about technical specification because they also do not know internals.
Philips marketing is here to sell the product to general public, not to technical experts and material they use and language must be set as the market requires it in order to sell the product. So no technical language but terminology people have adapted as standard. I am truly sorry that public has decided to use Native xxxxp for this. That is why I call experts, including myself in my field, ignorant, because we are wrong and in minority.
And I raised my voice because I saw on several places where claims from “experts” have caused fury and confusion from normal people - majority of buyers of this product. Where they started calling Philips names and asking for a refund - because it is not a Native 1080p and “Philips are liars and scammers”.
From experts I expect to get the fact that majority has a different, simplified, view of things, and that only experts have, think, or care about the details. Which is fine. Have your view, but have understanding of the rest of the world and accept it. Then introduce your knowledge to the world in a way it does not shatter it and make a mess just to prove you “point”, or “show off”.
If Philips did not write a Native 1080p they would from marketing/sales point of view create a disaster because their buyers would say ‘ok this is yet another Chinese low resolution projector, “it would have Native 1080p” if it was showing true FullHD image’.
What I do not see as right is when Chinese goods have Native 1080p and not providing that but rather only accepting the signal. That is a scam.
Really rather hypocritical of you… calling me ignorant, then ignoring the merits of what myself and others have to say, and then asking me to continue sharing technical knowledge.
I have laid out plenty of information that outlines why the apparent resolution from pixel shifting is not the same as native resolution. I have even shown that Texas Instruments specifically avoids the term ‘native resolution’ altogether.
You put forward the notion that we should abandon the correct use of a technical term because most people have been misinformed about what it really means.
I have no intention of perpetuating the misuse of the term, and I have no qualms in calling out Philips for misrepresenting a product when they are an electronics company selling technical products.
My original intention was to let other PPM purchasers know that they may not be getting what they expected from the marketing materials. Turns out that ‘native 1080p’ is not the only thing that was misrepresented, but that is a discussion for another thread.
To make things clear:
The native resolution of the DMD is 960x540, the output resolution of the projector is 1920x1080 by using pixel shifting technology. A device can only have one native resolution. If you are going to use the term native resolution, then it has to be 960x540. There is nothing stopping Philips from just dropping the ‘native’ term and calling it a 1080p projector.
It is rather pointless in this discussion to bring up hypothetical technologies because they are a complete unknown. It could be that it produces an equal range of resolutions at optimal quality, like CRT does, at which point the term native resolution doesn’t apply (see my earlier comment about the history of ‘native’ resolution).
Sefton, I would agree with you if TI advertises for example the 0,47 chip as Native FHD. Is it the case ? I don’t think it is (but may be wrong) because a chip is defined by the image it displays (in addition to other factors including numbers of micro mirrors). Once again, we come back to the pure definition of Native…
And it is not pointless to bring hypothetical technologies because they are here to put you into a perspective the world has on this issue, the world that does not care about your internal workings but the end result.
The moment I remove the problematic 540p DPD element inside, and have a Native 1080p picture on the outside with clearly visible unique pixels - you have no arguments on your side. And you find your self in the position of inventing different names for the projector output just not to call it Native 1080p. And that is why it is pointless to you. You and I both know that. Otherwise you would answer the question and not call it pointless.
It is still Native 1080p projector using a 540p DMD with pixel shifting (look I omitted the native here on purpose
Plus, your suggested website https://www.projectorcentral.com/Philips-PicoPix_Max.htm is going against you. They do not go at all into Native resolutions of sensors, they do not care, and they have decided to call a Native resolution just a resolution omitting use of native resolutions in general. On top of it it is not a sales site but a review site.
Not a native 1080p, no need to have a discussion about that. Your question about hypotheticals is exactly that: hypothetical. By all technical means, the output resolution is 1080p. Just not native, it’s not that hard to grasp.
Again, agree to disagree. put yourself in a shop selling projectors, my mother comes in and asks for a Native 1080p projector. What are you going to sell her?
I don’t think it is that simple as of today. Few years ago it was very simple as pixel shifting did not exist for projectors but instead it was scaling, which is way different than shifting. In the past, native was considered As being the maximum true resolution available (without scaling). Today it’s not true anymore and we are in a grey area. At the end of the day it does not matter if they say native or not but the mention of pixel shifting is relevant to manage expectations.
Also, request to all who have issues with Native 1080p:
When you get your PPM please switch it to its native resolution, every projector or monitor can be turned on to its native resoution. So please select in the options somewhere the actual native resolution, it must be there.
Because we know the best image is alway on a native resolution for a display device.
…We know… But is this really allowed? 
) all understand that it is super hard to have all 3 feature in (non-pixel shifting + portable + long battery life).
and is too bright to look into it. You are anyway not supposed to look into the chip to watch a movie, but to the projection screen - where resolution is 1080p.