My only question so far is this. Is there any way to not show the PROCESSING text when the PJ automatically changes lens memory for various aspects? With all the aspect changes in TRON: Legacy it got kinda old seeing that on screen.

As was posted above, there is not way to disable the "PROCESSING" message. I turned off the automatic lens memory. (I was afraid of what would happen when watching TV with all of the commercials that are in all sorts of weird aspect ratios!) The only good thing about the processing message is that while the AE4000 is displaying the message (and changing lens positions) is that it will NOT respond to any other command. So the message alerts you not to try to attempt to change any other setting until the message is gone.

... What other Aspects do you have stored in your PJ's? and What movies are in those other aspects?

Chris: Nice install.

Other than 2.35:1 and 1.78:1, you could store their slight variations. For example, 1.85:1, which essentially just moves up the 1.78:1 setting by 3 vertical adjustments, as you may prefer to have the slight black bar at the bottom. I used to have 2.37, 2.39, 2.40 all saved, but found them not making that much of a difference in viewing.

NoiseGoth,

I tried the section of the HP movie that you suggested first on my plasma, and then on the AE4000.
I played it with both the Iris turned on and off, and in Cinema 1 and Color 1 picture settings. I played the scene over probably 10 times and didn't get anything strange happening.
About 50% of the time that I had the Iris turned on, I could hear the mechanics of it working, but the change in lighting in the scene stayed consistent with what I saw on the plasma.

Maybe see if you can borrow another disc to see if you can possibly rule one or the other out as the cause.

BTW, I only tried the Blu-ray version, I didn't think about trying the DVD version too until just now.

Thanks, Brent, for your very thorough report. I appreciate the help. I'm increasingly of the opinion that this is a problem with the projector. I'll try to borrow another copy of the movie as you suggest, including DVD.

I've been trying to find another movie that displays the same behavior, specifically scenes with low light and very little contrast. So far, I've seen very short moments in Pitch Black (encoded avi) and Fellowship of the Rings (DVD) that may be similarly problematic. Nothing as dramatic as the HP disc, though.

Thanks again! I'll be sure to follow up if this is resolved.

man, I really want to get one of these Panasonic PT-AE4000 projectors, I've read mostly very good things about it. Is there another projector as good or better for the price? What about HDMI v1.4a and all that? (I'm not really into 3D, but just curious if Panasonic will upgrade to this version?)

I've been trying to find another movie that displays the same behavior, specifically scenes with low light and very little contrast. So far, I've seen very short moments in Pitch Black (encoded avi) and Fellowship of the Rings (DVD) that may be similarly problematic. Nothing as dramatic as the HP disc, though.

Another one to consider wold be The Dark Knight. There are lots of very low light scenes in that film.

Was able to repeat it on the Harry Potter disc at 1:11:25. The scene gets darker, almost completely washed out black, then pops back into higher brightness at around 1:11:50. Only happens with the iris on. Turning iris off fixes the problem.

Can someone else with this disc see how their projector acts at this time with the iris on?

Do you mean The Deathly Hallows Pt 1? I watched that movie around the time marks that you gave me and I didn't see a sudden change from dark to bright at 1:11:50 (during the scene where they first saw the snatchers). There was one a few minutes later, tho. I watched this scene and the transition to the next (which was dark to bright) with the iris on and didn't notice anything troubling.

*sigh* Thanks, wnl, for also confirming. I have an RMA from Panasonic this morning. We'll see if they can fix it. It's such a specific error, I worry they won't be able to reproduce it and won't bother fixing it.

I'll follow up. Thanks everyone for the help and advice!

^maybe send a long a DVD which exhibits the symptom and note the exact position where it occurs?

[Of course there's a possibility you'll never get the disc back so don't send something that losing would be heartbreaking]

Japanese consumer electronics giant Panasonic has said it will cut five percent of its workforce as part of efforts to restructure and streamline the company and recover losses from Japan’s March 11 earthquake. The cuts, expected to take up to two years to complete, will reduce the company’s numbers to 350,000. Currently, Panasonic’s headcount is just shy of 367,000 people. Also on the cards is the closure of up to 20 percent of Panasonic’s manufacturing facilities.


I hope this doesn't affect their projector division.

I hope this doesn't affect their projector division.
Especially the one designing the new model projectors :D

Especially the one designing the new model projectors :D

Here here

any word on the new 3D model? I wonder if they improved the brightness or contrast?

Panamorph UH380 :D @15ft

Hi there wider,

Just a question like that... do you have a Panamorph lens on your AE4000 mainly for DVD viewings? Cuz since BluRay isn't anamorphic, there's no point in a lens for viewing BluRay right?

Hi there wider,

Just a question like that... do you have a Panamorph lens on your AE4000 mainly for DVD viewings? Cuz since BluRay isn't anamorphic, there's no point in a lens for viewing BluRay right?

zax123: Nice theater build.

Anamorphic DVD's are for 16:9 AR, not for 2.35:1. So no difference here. You use a video scaler and an anamorphic lens for projection onto a scope screen, regardless if the source is a DVD or Blue Ray.

Hi there wider,

Just a question like that... do you have a Panamorph lens on your AE4000 mainly for DVD viewings? Cuz since BluRay isn't anamorphic, there's no point in a lens for viewing BluRay right?

An anamorphic lens has nothing to do with an anamorphic DVD. Both produce distortions in one axis, but for different (and unrelated) purposes.

Anamorphic: producing, relating to, or marked by intentional distortion (as by unequal magnification along perpendicular axes) of an image.

have their been frequent premature bulb explosions with this unit?

Has there been any user reports regarding lamp flickering on AE4000. I see the "aging" model is sold pretty cheap on some German internet stores and I'm tempted to upgrade from my 4 year old AE1000 which had bad iris mechanism fixed but still has flickering lamp every now and then.

An anamorphic lens has nothing to do with an anamorphic DVD. Both produce distortions in one axis, but for different (and unrelated) purposes.

Anamorphic: producing, relating to, or marked by intentional distortion (as by unequal magnification along perpendicular axes) of an image.

Hey guys,

I actually know what the lens does, I just don't see the need for an anamorphic lens when you have the AE4000 which has powered zoom and lens shift and the memory feature.

The only time I see it becoming handy is if you are watching an anamorphic DVD which of course utilizes more pixels for the widescreen shot but you need a lens to actually take advantage of it.

But since BluRay doesn't have the anamorphic feature, and actually uses less pixels when viewing a 2.35:1 movie vs. a 16:9 movie, I don't see the advantage of an anamorphic lens -- with the AE4000...

Hey guys,

I actually know what the lens does, I just don't see the need for an anamorphic lens when you have the AE4000 which has powered zoom and lens shift and the memory feature.

The only time I see it becoming handy is if you are watching an anamorphic DVD which of course utilizes more pixels for the widescreen shot but you need a lens to actually take advantage of it.

But since BluRay doesn't have the anamorphic feature, and actually uses less pixels when viewing a 2.35:1 movie vs. a 16:9 movie, I don't see the advantage of an anamorphic lens -- with the AE4000...

Some people are just old school, hard to teach and old dog new tricks :p

Any way the idea is that by using the entire pixel panel you will gain some brightness, that is really the only thing that a lense has going for it. Personaly I see no reason to distort a image and they fix it again. If we didn't have the lense memory of the 4000 though I would have one :rolleyes:

Hey guys,

... I just don't see the need for an anamorphic lens when you have the AE4000 which has powered zoom and lens shift and the memory feature.



Zooming vs. A Lens is always a touchy topic, man. You can certainly do either with this projector. I agree with someone posting early, that if you are thinking about using A lens, your may want to expand your projector choices beyond AE4K.



... an anamorphic DVD ... utilizes more pixels for the widescreen shot but you need a lens to actually take advantage of it.

But since BluRay doesn't have the anamorphic feature, and actually uses less pixels when viewing a 2.35:1 movie vs. a 16:9 movie, ...

My understanding is that the anamorphic DVD was designed to switch from a 4:3 TV set to a 16:9 HDTV, so an anamorphic DVD also uses only the middle 810 lines for scope movies, the same as a non-anamorphic Blu-Ray.

Not that the distinction has to be made, but the point is whether the source is anamorphic or not is not part of the decision of using A Lens or. zooming.

Thanks.

Hey guys,

I actually know what the lens does, I just don't see the need for an anamorphic lens when you have the AE4000 which has powered zoom and lens shift and the memory feature.

The only time I see it becoming handy is if you are watching an anamorphic DVD which of course utilizes more pixels for the widescreen shot but you need a lens to actually take advantage of it.

But since BluRay doesn't have the anamorphic feature, and actually uses less pixels when viewing a 2.35:1 movie vs. a 16:9 movie, I don't see the advantage of an anamorphic lens -- with the AE4000...

You may know what an anamorphic lens does but it is clear that you have no understanding of what an anamorphic DVD is.

Maximum resolution for an NTSC DVD is 720x480. That's an aspect ratio of 1.5:1 In order to put the full frame of a 1.77:1 (16:9) movie on it you would have to use letterboxes and the usable vertical resolution would be reduced to 405. A 2.35:1 movie is even worse (306 lines). In order to recapture all those lost vertical scan lines they introduced an anamorphic format that stretches the image vertically and allows for the use of those pixels that would otherwise be black. When an anamorphic disc is played on equipment that can display in 16:9, the image is re-stretched to fit. To my knowledge, all 16:9 display equipment on the market today will do this correctly, including all video projectors. No special lens is required to take advantage of the anamorphic format as the projector already does that.

Blu Ray does not have an anamorphic format because it doesn't need one. It's native video format is already 16:9 (1920x1080).

An anamorphic lens will benefit a DVD image in exactly the same way as it will a Blu Ray image.

You may know what an anamorphic lens does but it is clear that you have no understanding of what an anamorphic DVD is.

Maximum resolution for an NTSC DVD is 720x480. That's an aspect ratio of 1.5:1 In order to put the full frame of a 1.77:1 (16:9) movie on it you would have to use letterboxes and the usable vertical resolution would be reduced to 405. A 2.35:1 movie is even worse (306 lines). In order to recapture all those lost vertical scan lines they introduced an anamorphic format that stretches the image vertically and allows for the use of those pixels that would otherwise be black. When an anamorphic disc is played on equipment that can display in 16:9, the image is re-stretched to fit. To my knowledge, all 16:9 display equipment on the market today will do this correctly, including all video projectors. No special lens is required to take advantage of the anamorphic format as the projector already does that.

Blu Ray does not have an anamorphic format because it doesn't need one. It's native video format is already 16:9 (1920x1080).

An anamorphic lens will benefit a DVD image in exactly the same way as it will a Blu Ray image.

wnl,

I thought that even in 2.35:1, a DVD would use the full 480 vertical pixels and an anamorphic lens would correct the "squish". I was wrong, though, anamorphic DVDs only use about 364 lines in 2.35:1 movies.

I'm still baffled how the AE4000 can benefit from an anamorphic lens. Perhaps you can shed some light on that -- you seem to know your stuff!

... anamorphic DVDs only use about 364 lines in 2.35:1 movies.

...

My mistake for saying it was 810 lines. The point is anamorphic DVD is only up to 75% of its vertical resolution.

Has there been any user reports regarding lamp flickering on AE4000. I see the "aging" model is sold pretty cheap on some German internet stores and I'm tempted to upgrade from my 4 year old AE1000 which had bad iris mechanism fixed but still has flickering lamp every now and then.

I upgraded in October from my AE1000 to the AE4000 because of the annoying flicker in that older unit. Thankfully, there's been no flicker with the 4000 that I've experienced, and I read every page of this particular owner's thread before upgrading and never saw much mention of it--if any at all. It was a definitive problem with that older model, but they seem to have fixed it. The 4000 has an entirely different "red rich" bulb, apart from improved iris mechanisms, so it's a whole new animal.

I'm still baffled how the AE4000 can benefit from an anamorphic lens. Perhaps you can shed some light on that -- you seem to know your stuff!

Well...

An anamorphic lens will work just fine with the AE4000. Just how much benefit it provides is a matter of heated debate. Personally, I have an AE3000 (the older and less capable brother to the 4000) and don't use an A-lens. As I understand it the A-lens is only beneficial when watching 2.35:1 material. It isn't used for stuff that's 1.78:1. The idea is similar to what anamorphic DVD does for 1.78:1 material. You either use the projector or a video processor to stretch the image vertically (and crop off the letterboxing) then use the A-lens to shrink it back to the correct aspect ratio. The benefits are an increase in the brightness of the image (since you are using the entire panel in the projector for the image) and more vertical lines resolution. Also, for a projector without lens memory it is a way to make the shift from 16:9 to 2.35:1 projecting a bit more straightforward than manually rezooming and focusing. With enough hardware it could even be fully automated.

The benefits are an increase in the brightness of the image (since you are using the entire panel in the projector for the image) and more vertical lines resolution.

Doesn't give more lines of resolution, but does use more lines of the panel to project light. I know, I'm kind of being nitpicky, but there you go.

Ordered my bulb a few days ago fro Provantage and just received it. It's obviously the OEM lamp assembly.

My old bulb hit 2000 and I reset it. I've used another 100 hours on it. Are you guys milking the bulbs for more or should I just change it out?

I also have a damaged blue polorizer and possibly some dust issues. Can anyone off hand point me to the posts regarding cleaning the filters? I may give that a whirl. I've got compressed air. Can I just blow things around a bit?

Doesn't give more lines of resolution, but does use more lines of the panel to project light. I know, I'm kind of being nitpicky, but there you go.

I agree. It also eliminates 1:1 pixel mapping and has the potential of introducing scaling artifacts, whereas 1:1 pixel mapping is sort of like having a state of the art, perfect, artifact-free scaler, better known as "none".

Ordered my bulb a few days ago fro Provantage and just received it. It's obviously the OEM lamp assembly.

My old bulb hit 2000 and I reset it. I've used another 100 hours on it. Are you guys milking the bulbs for more or should I just change it out?

I also have a damaged blue polorizer and possibly some dust issues. Can anyone off hand point me to the posts regarding cleaning the filters? I may give that a whirl. I've got compressed air. Can I just blow things around a bit?

Hi Tony
If your new OEM lamp has a warranty, I suggest you to use it right now (while is covered) and keep the old one as spare.
The AE4000 is not fisically different to the old AE2000, so you can follow this tutorial:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12501773#post12501773
IMO, if you handle the compressed air can with care (do not shake it or tilt it) it's not risky to use it. I've used the can several times with my former-projectors. No dust blobs -yet- on my AE3000 (+1100 hs).

Thanks. I'll try those instructions this weekend. You're right on the warranty comment too. :)

I have a general question regarding the lens memory function.
When the lens memory function kicks in (processing), does the Lens Shift also adjust with the focus / zoom or is it just the later two without any change in the lens shift?
I am sure that the answer is somewhere in the thread but its a looooong thread!
Thanks.
Teecue

I have a general question regarding the lens memory function.
When the lens memory function kicks in (processing), does the Lens Shift also adjust with the focus / zoom or is it just the later two without any change in the lens shift?
I am sure that the answer is somewhere in the thread but its a looooong thread!
Thanks.
Teecue
Any changes to focus, zoom and lens shift done via the lens control menu and then saved will automatically adjust back to the saved format settings. The settings I have saved for a scope movie require no extra adjustments after 'processing' the image.

Any changes to focus, zoom and lens shift done via the lens control menu and then saved will automatically adjust back to the saved format settings. The settings I have saved for a scope movie require no extra adjustments after 'processing' the image.

Thanks for the reply. What I was interested to know was if there was ANY lens shifting involved in the whole process. I understand that the zoom and focus are adjusted accordingly but is there any physical lens shifting occurring?

Thanks for the reply. What I was interested to know was if there was ANY lens shifting involved in the whole process. I understand that the zoom and focus are adjusted accordingly but is there any physical lens shifting occurring?

Lens shift is manual via dials. So, no, lens memory does not adjust lens shift. (Otherwise, there would be no mounting limitations.)

Thanks.

Beautiful theater !!

Thanks TeeCue.

Are you trying to decide on a projector?

I just got an Epson 8350. I am just playing with its setup for CIH.

I see. Thanks.
I have a friend with it, lots of pop to the image, and very bright in dynamic mode. Nice projector.

Finally pulled the trigger and ordered the AE4000 from Projector People yesterday after procrastinating for about a year... time to see what this machine can do!

I just got an Epson 8350. I am just playing with its setup for CIH.

Does this unit do the lens memory.function the same as the ae4000?

Thanks for the reply. What I was interested to know was if there was ANY lens shifting involved in the whole process. I understand that the zoom and focus are adjusted accordingly but is there any physical lens shifting occurring?


There is no manual lens shift, no, however when using a smaller subset of the LCD panel's full area, say for a 2.35 AR movie, one can set both horizontally and vertically the part of the LCD panels which is to be centralized and this is memorized in the zoom/focus memory presets. This is what allows both people who use the projector in a ceiling mount mode as well as a table top mode, to use the CIH auto zoom feature presets successfully.

The range of possible displacement is much smaller than what the manual lens shift can accomplish, however it will move the image a substantial percentage of its inherent height.

This is my understanding at least.

Does this unit do the lens memory.function the same as the ae4000?
No, both the zoom and focus are manual.

There is no manual lens shift, no, however when using a smaller subset of the LCD panel's full area, say for a 2.35 AR movie, one can set both horizontally and vertically the part of the LCD panels which is to be centralized and this is memorized in the zoom/focus memory presets. This is what allows both people who use the projector in a ceiling mount mode as well as a table top mode, to use the CIH auto zoom feature presets successfully.

The range of possible displacement is much smaller than what the manual lens shift can accomplish, however it will move the image a substantial percentage of its inherent height.

This is my understanding at least.

That explains a lot. Thanks. But does that then mean that the size of the top and bottom black bars projected off the screen is different in ceiling mount and table top placement?

No, both the zoom and focus are manual.

Does epson have a model that has the memory function like the ae4k?

That explains a lot. Thanks. But does that then mean that the size of the top and bottom black bars projected off the screen is different in ceiling mount and table top placement?

No, I believe they are the same regardless of ceiling vs table mounting.

Does epson have a model that has the memory function like the ae4k?

Epson announced Home Cinema 21000 and Pro 31000 models late last year, which would have motorized zoom, focus, AND lens shift, obviously aimed at topping the AE4K. The models though have since been postponed repeatedly until it becomes indefinitely delayed. Looks like they will be merged into or become the 2012 models to be released later this year.

I have looked high and low for some instructions to setup CIH for 2.35:1 using Zoom & Memory features with the AE4000 ... no luck. If anyone can point me in the right direction or describe what you've done that would be great. My primary questions are around specific steps to zoom to fill the 2.35:1 screen.

Steps so far ...
First I setup the projector on a table within screen high. I centered the picture for 16:9 and saved that to memory. Then zoomed out. The image does not stay centered, so I adjusted the v-position in the menu. I had to move the v-position pretty far which makes the center crosshairs of the test pattern move pretty high on the screen. Can someone help me fill in the blanks on what steps to follow and what to expect.

Thanks !!

I have looked high and low for some instructions to setup CIH for 2.35:1 using Zoom & Memory features with the AE4000 ... no luck. If anyone can point me in the right direction or describe what you've done that would be great. My primary questions are around specific steps to zoom to fill the 2.35:1 screen.

Steps so far ...
First I setup the projector on a table within screen high. I centered the picture for 16:9 and saved that to memory. Then zoomed out. The image does not stay centered, so I adjusted the v-position in the menu. I had to move the v-position pretty far which makes the center crosshairs of the test pattern move pretty high on the screen. Can someone help me fill in the blanks on what steps to follow and what to expect.

Thanks !!

Here's a post with a good explanation of how zoom CIH works, followed by the setup steps:
http://fractal.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20261827#post20261827

Sounds like your main problem is you are adjusting V-POSITION in the POSITION menu, not V-AREA POSITION in the LENS CONTROL menu?

Hey everyone,

just received my ae4000 today, got it for a great deal here in Canada at $1800 from a panny employee. I will be setting it up in the upcoming weeks with 120" 16:9 Carada BW screen (mostly for watching sports and such).

I just have a few questions...as far as the settings on the unit out of the box is there a lot to be played around with? I know that every room is unique with lighting and colour and size of the room playing a factor but are there any settings that I should be adjusting specifically or taking special consideration?

Thank you in advance for your help!

Hey everyone,

just received my ae4000 today, got it for a great deal here in Canada at $1800 from a panny employee. I will be setting it up in the upcoming weeks with 120" 16:9 Carada BW screen (mostly for watching sports and such).

I just have a few questions...as far as the settings on the unit out of the box is there a lot to be played around with? I know that every room is unique with lighting and colour and size of the room playing a factor but are there any settings that I should be adjusting specifically or taking special consideration?

Thank you in advance for your help!

As you will use it mostly to watch sports, I assume you will use either the “Normal” or “Colour 1” picture mode. Depending on your specific setup (e.g. screen material, ceiling and wall colour, level of ambient light, etc.), you may find the default colour temperature of these 2 modes is too high (in my case, when the “Colour Temperature” is at its default setting of 0, “Color 1” gives me an average colour temp. of 7500K, and “Normal” gives me an average of 10000K – measured by my Spyder3TV colorimeter). Therefore, if you find the bluish look bothers you, consider to turn down the “Colour Temperature” setting by a few clicks. Of course, if you go for the calibration route using colorimeter/spectrometer (either done by professional calibrator or by yourself), that is another story – in which case you don’t need to bother with this control, but rather the white balance controls in the Advanced picture menu (i.e. Contrast R/G/B & Brightness R/G/B).

I have been with this unit for almost 17 months; and I found it really needs a full calibration (of grayscale, gamma, and colour gamut) to get the most out of this projector. At the very least, try to use a calibration disc (e.g. DVE HD Basics that come with a blue filter) to get at least the brightness, contrast, sharpness, color & tint set at the right level.

A few settings that you may be interested to tweak around:

(1) Dynamic Iris – AE4000’s DI is quite good – meaning it’s effective with very little side effect; worth to give it a try (but for me, I turn it OFF all the time as its negative effect still bothers me; and I don’t need the DI after my unit is fully calibrated).

(2) Frame Creation – for sports, try at least Mode 1 (i.e. the modest setting) to see if you like it. It can substantially reduce motion blur. You may not like Mode 2 or 3 as it may make the motion too fluid – but worth a try. Beware a stronger mode will introduce higher video delay – so it requires you to adjust the audio delay in your AV receiver (if you have one) to compensate. Otherwise, you will easily find the audio and video out-of-sync.

(3) Detail Clarity – give it a try at +3 (or even +4). I found the setting of +3 (with the main Sharpness control set at the default of 0) works best for me. By the way, if you’re using a calibration disc like DVE, you will find the right setting easily that gives you the best sharpness without the side effect of halo/ringing.

Thank you for the informative reply! I will definitely take a look at those options that you suggested. I noticed in your post you talked about calibration discs. I have been looking online and the DVE: HD basics (blu-ray) is a popular one. Is there any other you would recommend investing in?

Here is another that is getting fairly good views on amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Spears-Munsil-High-Definition-Benchmark-Blu-ray/dp/B001UM29OC/ref=pd_bxgy_d_img_c


Thanks again!

Thank you for the informative reply! I will definitely take a look at those options that you suggested. I noticed in your post you talked about calibration discs. I have been looking online and the DVE: HD basics (blu-ray) is a popular one. Is there any other you would recommend investing in?

Here is another that is getting fairly good views on amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Spears-Munsil-High-Definition-Benchmark-Blu-ray/dp/B001UM29OC/ref=pd_bxgy_d_img_c


Thanks again!

Or you can download the free AVSHD 709 calibration patterns from here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=948496

But you need to burn the .iso files into a DVD disc (or a BD disc). I personally prefer this one over the DVE HD - but you need to get a blue filter in order to be able to set color & tint correctly.

I have no experience on the Spears & Munsil disc.

Disney has this thru their movie club for $19.95:

The Disney WOW World of Wonder Disc is a definitive "how to" guide for in-home High Definition (HD) optimization of home entertainment systems featuring the help of classic Disney character Goofy and including HD demonstration clips from popular Disney titles including TOY STORY, UP, BOLT, and PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END. The easy to follow on-screen guide is designed to help consumers get the best quality experience from their home theater systems by providing everyone from beginners and enthusiasts to experts and custom installers alike with valuable high quality calibration tools.

Here's a screen shot review (http://www.techrepublic.com/photos/reviewed-blu-ray-setup-discs-for-your-hdtv-screenshots/6231931?tag=thumbnail-view-selector;get-photo-roto) of several discs.

^I know nothing of this disc. I haven't seen it; for all I know it may be great, but it, the concept, reminds me of a common theme I see in many video forum posts which use, um , animation and CGI to judge video reproduction accuracy. [For example, when people post screen shots of this and other projectors, seems like animations are their goto favs.]:

"Goofy's fur coat color was very accurately rendered as well as Shrek's green skin. Shadow details, contrast punch, and edge sharpness were natural and true. Hats off to the colorists at Panasonic for their truthful renditions and focus to detail!"

Oy.

Um, hello, Shrek and Goofy don't exist in real life and their color is nothing more than an arbitrary selection by the animators! How on earth would you know if it is accurate?

In a roughly analogous way , using electric instruments instead of acoustic ones to judge say speakers is rather silly. Don't like the vast majority of electric guitars have a frickin' tone control right on the very instrument!

How on earth is one going to judge tonality when the source device doesn't even have a tonality; it's completely variable, set by the musician's whim.

You obviously didn't look at the screen shots in the link.

True. That's why I said, "I know nothing of this disc", however based on your description alone, that lists 3 of the 4 demonstration clips as coming from animated movies, I'm confident I never will choose to either. Sorry to be blunt, but that's how I see it.

I would always recommend buying a METER if not going to pay a pro calibrator, then following the calibration guide for dummies.

The only other potential way to calibrate a projector is if your desktop LCD monitor has a D65 mode, then you can reference tons and tons of skin tones and keep making corrective adjustments. Your LCD monitor may not be a perfectly flat D65, but mine is fairly close in "COOL" mode, but I used a meter to verify it. A meter is still better.

Even a calibrated projector can still have issues with skin tones sometimes, as some projectors don't process the image the same way.

I often split screen two or more perfectly D65 calibrated devices to compare skin tones and may make some tiny adjustments to the GAMMA curve away from a non-std GAMMA or just tiny color adjustments away from D65 on a certain device.

Having color OFF a little mainly just hurts the PJ experience in the form of inaccurate skin tones, most other stuff isn't as bothersome to the eye.

I am in the final stages of deciding on a projector. The Panasonic AE4000 is my front runner with the Epson 8700 in 2nd.

One compelling feature of the AE4000 is the ability to preset and change the AR from 2:35 to 16:9. But I have a challenge with this feature. From reading the forums, I understand it would be necessary for the projector to be mounted within the frame of the screen for the zoom to work. If that is the case, I would need to drop the projector 3 feet from my ceiling. Yikes! This is because a I have 1' "pop up" ceiling, where the projector would be mounted, and then lowered at least 2 feet more from the top of the main ceiling. I have a 9 foot ceiling (plus 1' pop up)and my throw would be about 12'7" with two rows of seating at 9"10" and 13'. The largest 2:35 AR screen I can fit is 120" diagonal with a height of 47". Is the 3' drop indeed necessary under this scenerio? Alternatives?

Assuming I went ahead and mounted it at 18" and the "auto zoom to 2:35" feature would not work, is the AE4000 still a good choice with a 2:35 AR screen? As another alternative I might be able to place the projector on a shelf in the back of the room but this would be about 18-20' from the screen and dimmer. As a final alternative, I could go with a 1:78 AR screen at about 106" diagonal. I would much appreciate your insight and opinions. Thanks!

I am in the final stages of deciding on a projector. The Panasonic AE4000 is my front runner with the Epson 8700 in 2nd.

One compelling feature of the AE4000 is the ability to preset and change the AR from 2:35 to 16:9. But I have a challenge with this feature. From reading the forums, I understand it would be necessary for the projector to be mounted within the frame of the screen for the zoom to work. If that is the case, I would need to drop the projector 3 feet from my ceiling. Yikes! This is because a I have 1' "pop up" ceiling, where the projector would be mounted, and then lowered at least 2 feet more from the top of the main ceiling. I have a 9 foot ceiling (plus 1' pop up)and my throw would be about 12'7" with two rows of seating at 9"10" and 13'. The largest 2:35 AR screen I can fit is 120" diagonal with a height of 47". Is the 3' drop indeed necessary under this scenerio? Alternatives?

Assuming I went ahead and mounted it at 18" and the "auto zoom to 2:35" feature would not work, is the AE4000 still a good choice with a 2:35 AR screen? As another alternative I might be able to place the projector on a shelf in the back of the room but this would be about 18-20' from the screen and dimmer. As a final alternative, I could go with a 1:78 AR screen at about 106" diagonal. I would much appreciate your insight and opinions. Thanks!
First, definitely go 2.35, and don't settle for less than a 120" screen.

12'7 is close to the limit for a 120" scope screen. If your second row is at 13', put the projector directly above their heads, so there's no way they can hit it standing up, and the seating below prevents anyone from walking into it.

If you go the 18-20' throw, you'll still need to have the projector lens near the top of the screen. You can fudge it a little by angling the projector down, possibly angling the screen up, and living with some keystone distortion. You could of course use the keystone correction, but there are laws against that in many jurisdictions. ;)

So my advice is mount the projector properly, with the top of the lens level with the top of the screen. The 13' throw will give you the brightest image.

But there are many variables, you need to choose what's best for you. Don't give up on CIH, though, it's well worth it: every time you watch a scope movie you'll know you made the right choice.

True. That's why I said, "I know nothing of this disc", however based on your description alone, that lists 3 of the 4 demonstration clips as coming from animated movies, I'm confident I never will choose to either. Sorry to be blunt, but that's how I see it.
As 73shark said, they are DEMONSTRATION videos. The tests themselves are professional, well done, easy to use and provide excellent results. Closing your mind to alternative products without any research seems to be a little closed minded. That's the way I see it.

True. That's why I said, "I know nothing of this disc", however based on your description alone, that lists 3 of the 4 demonstration clips as coming from animated movies, I'm confident I never will choose to either. Sorry to be blunt, but that's how I see it.

If you check the Tech Republic screen shots of all three discs, you'll see that they all have about the same type of cal. screens. Now the Disney disc may also include some animated screen shots, but that doesn't necessarily detract from the rest of it.

Personally the only one I've used is the HVE: HD Basics Blu-ray. So far I found it to have fairly clunky menus, about on par w/ my Pro8100 manual. :eek:

If I get this projector and mount it at 17 feet, will it no longer be able to do a CIH on a 48" high screen?

If I get this projector and mount it at 17 feet, will it no longer be able to do a CIH on a 48" high screen?

Should work fine at that throw distance.
http://www.projectorcentral.com/Panasonic-PT-AE4000U-projection-calculator-pro.htm

Should work fine at that throw distance.
http://www.projectorcentral.com/Panasonic-PT-AE4000U-projection-calculator-pro.htm

OK...just got worried about the 12'7 is close to the limit for a 120" scope screen...but you were probably talking about it being too close and not too far away, right?

As the op I would be interested too if the 12'7 is the limit for being close to the screen. I would also have a row of seating at 9'10.

On the mounting it looks like I am going to have to drop the projector 3 feet from the ceiling. Will it be an eye sore hanging down like this? Has anyone else had to go with such a mounting solution?

Hi:

I have a mid sized room for my home theater.
The screen I have chosen is 117 Inch wide 2.37 SeymourAV screen.
Room is 23 feet long but the seating distance will be around 14 feet.
The walls the grey, ceiling will be brown and light can be controlled.
I will like to have the option of some ambient light.
I will be watching movies most of the time and some NFL games.
I like Panasonic 4000AE for its ability to change aspect ratios.
However when I use the calculator pro it only shows image brightnes of 8FL. This seems a bit low. Even the ProjectReviews.com says great things about this projector but recommends screens smaller than 110.

Have you used this projector with a screen of my size?
Is the image bright enough for you?I am looking at Panasonic 4000AE and BenQ W6000. Both of same price. I like Panasonic brand in general and features of this projector but the brightness is a concern for me.

OK...just got worried about the 12'7 is close to the limit for a 120" scope screen...but you were probably talking about it being too close and not too far away, right?

Yes, at maximum 2x zoom, you can just fill a 120" 2.35 screen, according to the calculator. But you don't want to be right at the limit, or Murphy's Law will come into play...

On the mounting it looks like I am going to have to drop the projector 3 feet from the ceiling. Will it be an eye sore hanging down like this? Has anyone else had to go with such a mounting solution?

My projector hovers above a back row of barstools. The bottom of the projector is at 6'2" from the floor dangling from a ceiling mount. I don't even notice it! Check out pictures from my build. I have had several guests who (a little goofy) ask me where the image is coming from and don't notice the giant box over their head!

As the op I would be interested too if the 12'7 is the limit for being close to the screen. I would also have a row of seating at 9'10.

On the mounting it looks like I am going to have to drop the projector 3 feet from the ceiling. Will it be an eye sore hanging down like this? Has anyone else had to go with such a mounting solution?
With the lights up, only you can decide if it's an eyesore. During a movie, you won't notice it. My theater has a very low ceiling, so the bottom of the projector is only 6' from the floor. But since it's above and slightly behind a couch, there's no way to bump into it or hit your head when standing up.

Have you used this projector with a screen of my size?

I am close...I have the AE 3000 with a 115" wide 2.35:1 Seymour AT Screen with the projector 17' from the screen in a completely light controlled room and it is plenty bright enough for me even after 1000 hours of use. I use Econ lamp mode with the Cinema 1 setting...

The screen I have chosen is 117 Inch wide 2.37 SeymourAV screen.
Room is 23 feet long but the seating distance will be around 14 feet.
The walls the grey, ceiling will be brown and light can be controlled.
I will like to have the option of some ambient light.
I will be watching movies most of the time and some NFL games.
I like Panasonic 4000AE for its ability to change aspect ratios.
However when I use the calculator pro it only shows image brightnes of 8FL. This seems a bit low. Even the ProjectReviews.com says great things about this projector but recommends screens smaller than 110.

Have you used this projector with a screen of my size?
Is the image bright enough for you?I am looking at Panasonic 4000AE and BenQ W6000. Both of same price. I like Panasonic brand in general and features of this projector but the brightness is a concern for me.Don't worry about it, it will be plenty bright. I have a 131" diagonal 2.35 screen, 15' throw and it's perfectly usable even with ambient light.

If you're going with a scope screen you definitely want the AE4000's automated zoom, I wouldn't even consider a manual zoom projector like the Benq.

I light up a 138" grey scope screen from a 14'4" throw and it lights it up great. I have a window right next to the screen also, but I bought a room darkening shade for it so I have no issues with ambient light. The picture gets a little washed out mid day, but I pretty much use it only in the evenings and nighttime. Having lights on in the back of the room is no problem. And I have a fairly low ceiling, the PJ is only 77" off the floor and I barely notice it.

The reason why I was concerned was because I am going with Seymour AV screen which is Acoustically Transparent. So it will have no gain at all.

I love Panasonic automatic zoom feature and have great experience with Panasonic stuff in the past.

Thanks

hehateme, I wouldn't be too worried. I have a DIY shearweave 4500 acoustically transparent screen (the same material as the old seymour av screens) My screen is 115" wide (not diagonal) 2.35 and I'm at 2300hrs still using eco mode with color 1.

I have a new bulb but don't see the need to put it in yet, the picture is still fine even with lights on for sports or tv. My throw is 16'

I have a new bulb but don't see the need to put it in yet, the picture is still fine even with lights on for sports or tv. My throw is 16'

If the new one has a warranty, you might want to use it and keep the old one as a backup.

Shark, it does. Fortunately Victoria has what seems to be one of the last family owned audio video stores where my buddy works and I know the owner, so if I put it and it dies I'm not too concerned.
If I had ordered it online it would have been installed the day it arrived :)

Good friends to have. :)

Is there any time table for the release of new Panasonic Projector?
I need the projector by mid July so I can wait another 2 months before buying 4000AE.
I was trying to accept that I will have to live with Benq W6000 manual zoom.
It is going to be great to be able to press a button and change aspect ratio.

Thank you so much for your feedback.

^Late Sept at the very soonest, probably more like Oct.

If I mounted the projector ~6" higher than the top of my screen

Don't worry about it, it will be plenty bright. I have a 131" diagonal 2.35 screen, 15' throw and it's perfectly usable even with ambient light.

If you're going with a scope screen you definitely want the AE4000's automated zoom, I wouldn't even consider a manual zoom projector like the Benq.

I light up a 138" grey scope screen from a 14'4" throw and it lights it up great. I have a window right next to the screen also, but I bought a room darkening shade for it so I have no issues with ambient light. The picture gets a little washed out mid day, but I pretty much use it only in the evenings and nighttime. Having lights on in the back of the room is no problem. And I have a fairly low ceiling, the PJ is only 77" off the floor and I barely notice it.

What picture mode and lamp mode are you guys using? Also, what gain screen are you using?

I was thinking about the Panny, as well, but got concerned with the low foot-lamberts that I was calculating.

Thanks,
Greg

Everyone views brightness differently.
The target is 16 FTL for movies watching with no ambient light, yet I prefer my FTL's around 18-20 even for movies (sometimes I lower it to 14-16 depends on what I'm watching).

For someone with my brightness preferences, I would not do the Panny on that size of a screen for anything less than a 2.0 gain or higher screen.

Another problem with answering this question is you can certainly get a LOT more lumens on any projector by going into less accurate and brighter modes, but for purists or enthusiasts that want the best picture, it is generally not an acceptable trade-off once you count lamp degradation over time.

For TV, sometimes I like to see things over 20 FTL just for eye melting POP!

You also have to consider lamp drop-off, expect anywhere from 25% loss to greater in the first 200-500 hours (all lamps vary greatly in this as well as your usage habits, how many times you turn the PJ off and ON, how many hours in a row, how hot your lamp gets, etc...)

What picture mode and lamp mode are you guys using? Also, what gain screen are you using?

I was thinking about the Panny, as well, but got concerned with the low foot-lamberts that I was calculating.

Thanks,
Greg

My 131" screen is 1.1 gain. I use Eco bulb mode and a slightly tweaked Normal picture mode. At some point I may switch from eco to normal bulb mode, but don't feel the need yet (1100 hours).

Color1 and Cinema1 picture modes are more accurate but much dimmer than Normal. I may appreciate the improved accuracy, but my wife and guests don't see it. However, everyone appreciates improved brightness, so Normal is my default setting, with some small color temperature and saturation corrections.

For critical viewing alone I'll sometimes switch to Color1/Normal bulb, but otherwise the Normal picture/Eco bulb setting gets plenty of wows.

The foot-lambert readings above 14 that Coderguy mentions are brighter than most commercial theaters. You don't need that kind of brightness unless you are competing with a great deal of ambient light.

The way I figure, I'm getting about 8fl on my 168" 2.35 screen. Never had a concern over brightness. My opinion is that for the vast majority of users, the attention to accuracy and brightness are a non issues. I understand and respect it is important to some, but believe only a purist videophile will appreciate it. Most everyone with a 2k projector are casual hobbiest. I think the casual hobbiest will appreciate size over technical nuances.

By the way, installing my new bulb today! :D

The foot-lambert readings above 14 that Coderguy mentions are brighter than most commercial theaters. You don't need that kind of brightness unless you are competing with a great deal of ambient light.

Most are at 15-16 as far as I know, and having been to the theater, I can assure you I've seen a few brighter than that (saw it too bright once when watched Star Trek at IMAX, way way too bright, they had it in torch mode).

As I said, I love blindly brighter images more than most people.

If your eye-lids aren't catching on fire, you don't have enough POP :)

What picture mode and lamp mode are you guys using? Also, what gain screen are you using?

I was thinking about the Panny, as well, but got concerned with the low foot-lamberts that I was calculating.

Thanks,
Greg
I use eco mode and color 1. PLENTY bright for me. I know coderguy is an expert and has a keen eye for this stuff. He tests all kinds of PJ's/screens and I guess would be considered an expert, so his opinion is very valid.

Personally for me, I don't like overly bright displays on anything. On all of my plasmas and LCD's, I put them on movie mode or standard and turn on power saving features to bring the brightness down. In my theater, I sit 13' from a 138" screen and it is VERY bright. Trust me, I went back and forth with this trying to figure out if this projector will light up a huge 1.0 gain screen. It absolutely will. I traded contrast for brightness and mounted it as close to the screen as I could and still fill it. It calculated out to 13FL to start and even at a couple hundred hours now, I notice no difference in brightness. The picture still looks fabulous to me.

If you are on the fence on whether this PJ can do it, and you REALLY want the auto zoom for cinemascope, I recommend just biting the bullet and doing it. Try and mount it as close to the screen as you can and still fill it for maximum brightness. You will find out that it will be plenty bright for 'most' people and hopefully you. Good luck!

It's not that I think you guys dont have it bright enough, I'm just thinking in terms of lamp cost, that's all.
I owned a Sanyo for so many years I suffered after 1000 hours too long, always thinking, DO I BUY A NEW LAMP YET?

I'm also thinking in terms of the average guy's room, but if your ROOM is truely a near-blackened bat-cave, even 10 FTL - 12 FTL can do just fine for many.

However, if you are taking these FTL readings from an eye-one, throw them in the trash, I assure you they are most likely not anywhere close to accurate.

I suppose the final piece of measuring equipment is what your eyes tell you. Only recently, at 2100 hours on the bulb, have I started to feel like I'd appreciate more "pop". I'm about to get that later today!

And for accurate reference, yes, I am in 100% darkness with a darkly painted room.

And for accurate reference, yes, I am in 100% darkness with a darkly painted room.

Yup that's why, I even have a partially white ceiling, but I deal with it using redirection of ambient light with an HP screen and black sheets tacked to the ceiling, not to mention other ways.
Still my room is probably just slightly above average, whereas your room sounds exceptionally SUPERB!
I will have a better room soon, and I doubt I will feel the need to use 18 FTL anymore.

For the majority of people though, brightness does become an issue in the average room and having a little GAIN to give your lamp a little extra LIFE surely won't hurt most people.
Just a thought.

I have a white false ceiling, but the wall colors were light also. Painting all the walls a dark color made a HUGE difference in the room as you guys all know. I do notice the reflectivity off the ceiling, but doing something about that is a battle I am not going to win with the wife so I'll live with it. I do the vast majority of my viewing at night, so my ambient light issues are minimum.

Yup, it cannot be stressed enough how important your room is.
Of course mounting location, personal preferences, screen gain, all that stuff affects the PQ as well.

Don't worry about my OCD though or what I say about projectors too much, I am an overly critical person about projectors right now (I simply trained my eye to find the fault in everything, not necessarily a good thing either). Maybe my eye is well trained at the moment, but it doesn't equate to what someone watching movies actually experiences, it only equates to looking directly for faults in the image. Mostly only really critical people also looking for the fault in everything would be on-par with my level of pickiness.

In most cases I could probably swap 3-4 modern projectors out secretly without someone knowing, and they couldn't tell the difference if they were calibrated the same.

I wasn't even happy with a $5000 Sony at $1300, so you can get the point that I am pickier than 99% of the people in here. I expect it's just a personal phase I'm going through, as I had no trouble watching a sorely old Sanyo z5 for many years, and the Panny 4000 (or any modern projector) blows that projector to smitherines.

It's my enthusiasm for a better image that always keeps me wanting for more, a true disease of the mind.

Pretty much next time I go to an Imax, I'm sure I'll find something wrong with the picture as well (for starters black levels).

By the way, installing my new bulb today! :D
Hey Tony, you could do us all a favor by conducting a little experiment.:)

Hopefully you have a digital camera, even a point and shoot of any old resolution and quality would do just fine, as long as it has manual control of both aperture and shutter speed (and ISO). Take a picture of a scene with the old bulb and then after putting in the new bulb take another picture of exactly the same scene (I'd freeze/pause it from my DVR or disc player and use a tripod or rest the camera on a stable surface, if at all possible).

The key is that so as to not let the camera readjust its light sensitivity for the new brighter bulb, you must maintain the exact same aperture, shutter speed, and ISO for both shots.

Although new bulbs are expected to be brighter, sure, how much so varies, and I also suspect a lot of people over exaggerate the difference, not that it doesn't exist but rather because they weren't so much expecting it. Using your camera as an objective test instrument without bias or expectations would help us analyze this.

Thanks.

The easier and proper way is to go grab you a $35 LX1330B from Amazon.com. It is a light meter.
In the JVC thread, someone tested it against the CA-803 (a $200 light meter), and said the $35 LX1330B was within just a few percentage points of being accurate.

I think everyone should own one of these if they want to know what their true FTL reading is.

You can also take contrast readings from them, although they won't be as perfectly accurate to compare the contrast readings to PRO readings, but should give you some RELATIVELY comparative data for different modes overall.

I can tell you from experience the brightness drops are all over the place, even the same model of the same projector can have greater than 50% variance across 2000 hours of usage.
It has to do with how hot the room is, how dusty the fan is, how long the projector was run at what temperature, what the altitude the projector is at, whether or not the PJ was run in HIGH LAMP for x hours, and I could go on and on and on (like I usually do)....

"Easier and proper", maybe, but asking him to do that is unreasonable.

What I requested is completely free, immediate, causes no delay to his continuing enjoyment of the projector's use, and only takes a few minutes of his time.

Right, I agree.

I'm not asking, simply stating something everyone can do for another little cool thing they can own. I'm sure if you spent $2000 on a projector, another $35 for a device that MIGHT even help you calibrate to a higher NATIVE CONTRAST isn't a total waste of money :)

I can do the photo thing. I've got a Nikon D60. I'll record camera settings and take before and after of at least two types of scenes. One, bright and colorful. The second, of a dark scene. The dark scene because although I feel little loss in brightness, I do feel like the old bulb has lost it's contrast and black level abilities.

It'll be a fun experiment. My day is getting clogged up, so can't promise it by today, but certainly within the next few.

Thanks Tony. No rush.

Another thing that might be fun (and also free) is to look at two bulbs, side by side in good room light, and see if there is any visual diffence. Does the old one look dusty? Yellowed? Fogged?

Be careful, of course, not to mix them up!:)

If I mounted the projector ~6" higher than the top of my screen

Anyone?
I need to get the projector as high as possible due to a low ceiling and a seating riser

^There's no problem mounting it that high or even higher, providing you don't need to use the CIH auto zoom feature, which necessitates you not mount it any higher than the screen height (or so, I once measured a couple of inches higher as being just "passable", but don't hold me to it).

If you do want to use the auto zoom thingy from way up there, then you are going to need to angle the entire projector downward, normally a no-no, and the screen upward (so as to not introduce key-stoning). keep in mind seeing the screen tilted back may look odd and may introduce a trapezoidal image from your viewing position to some degree. How bad that is is up to you.

Anyone?
I need to get the projector as high as possible due to a low ceiling and a seating riser
There are TONS of posts in this thread on this issue. Do some searching within the thread. If you want to use the lens memory feature, you will need to get the lens closer to within the screen area. It sounds like you can angle the projector and use some keystone correction, but at the price of picture quality.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20235820&highlight=within#post20235820

^There's no problem mounting it that high or even higher, providing you don't need to use the CIH auto zoom feature, which necessitates you not mount it any higher than the screen height (or so, I once measured a couple of inches higher as being just "passable", but don't hold me to it).

If you do want to use the auto zoom thingy from way up there, then you are going to need to angle the entire projector downward, normally a no-no, and the screen upward (so as to not introduce key-stoning). keep in mind seeing the screen tilted back may look odd and may introduce a trapezoidal image from your viewing position to some degree. How bad that is is up to you.

Thx
I was hoping to use the auto zoom feature. My screen is 2.4 aspect but I will be watching 16:9 content as well. I have found a variety of info searching this relatively long thread, some of which is conflicting. I know that the top of the screen is recommended but that some have placed the projector a little higher and still use the auto zoom with good results. I guess I'm trying to determine how high is too high.

I just took my "before" screenshots. Recorded all my camera settings. If I use the same settings for the "after" screenshots, I expect that they will be overexposed. No?

Obviously the settings need to stay constant for a fair comparison, but I'm thinking the after shots are going to look worse due to overexposure.

Yes, in theory the after shots will be over exposed, but I don't think by an entire f stop. You could take some before shots at one stop too dim (half the shutter speed, for example ) additionally, if you want though.

I was considering running the AE4000 for a 150" 2.35:1 screen with a 1.3 gain rating, but I think now I am going to wait for the AE5000 to come out since it seems it is very close now. I do plan on running it right at full zoom in 2.35 mode for optimum brightness. I think it will be plenty bright and with the higher gain screen and the pj zoomed out all the way it should look great. I have a dedicated room with total light control and very dark walls everywhere. By my calculations the brightness should be about 14-15ftl with a new bulb so there is adequate room there for dimming. This is also in Cinema mode for movie viewing, so obviously I can get to the 25-30ftl range for sports and tv if necessary by calibaring in the brighter modes.

People need to realize alot can be done in a dark room with total light control. I have also debated using the HC4000 because I like the sharpness and pop of DLP and it also does CIH (although it must be changed manually at will.)

Found the below snippet from another thread:

Commercial cinemas using film print are S-curve gamma with midpoint gamma of about 3.0. While DCI digital cinemas use 2.6 gamma.
For consumer material like blu-ray and dvd mastering display monitor gamma is 2.22 USA, 2.35 EBU Europe, with tolerance for 2.2-2.5,
everything should be mastered to be watchable at gamma 2.2-2.5 on our home theaters.

Theatrical presentation tolerance 11-17 foot lamberts center of the screen with uniformity 70%+.

-------------------------------------------

If you are going to get 13fL - 15fL in Best Mode, that's not TOO bad because you can compensate by doing a secondary NEAR BEST MODE that is BRIGHTER after some lamp wear, but it can always be better. It doesn't hurt to have a little GAIN on the screen to give you a margin.

However, given that a LAMP can easily lose 10% of it's brightness at 100 hours, if you were to start higher say at around 18fL, this quickly drops down to about 16fL after just a 100 hours on many projectors. It only goes down from there. So keep in mind the starting range and eventual target range vary depending on many factors. The biggest problem with going too low on the foot lamberts is you can no longer calibrate to a maximum NATIVE CONTRAST, and you may also find that using the IRIS at these lower brightness levels to not be optimal.

Why do something that is based on some posters claims, why not go by standards?

The point is that you can watch a DIMMER picture and it is quite enjoyable, but it is not what might be OPTIMAL.
What works and what is ACCEPTABLE is not the same as what is OPTIMAL.

Since I'm guessing about 1 out of every 4 lamps can abnormally lose 50% of their brightness at only 500-1000 hours or even less, this is another reason to have a MARGIN. It's not just about the fL you get right away, it's about overall odds and statistics for the average person's HT.
You can watch stuff at 10fL to 12fL and it is REALLY good enough for most things, but 10fL is pushing it and as you get lower than that, there are issues.
I see people throwing all these fL numbers around, but unless they are using a LIGHT METER, the numbers don't mean anything. Even calculating LUMENS on a new lamp by using the MFR specs guidelines and then converting to FL is not FULLY accurate.

I saw in another thread people throwing around 8fL numbers and saying 8fL is great, no problems, but later they found out they were really watching the image at 13fL.

Just reached 100 hours on my lamp life, so I am planning to vacuum the filter. Just a really basic question: Should i vacuum the side that faces to the back of the PJ, or both sides of the filter?

Just reached 100 hours on my lamp life, so I am planning to vacuum the filter. Just a really basic question: Should i vacuum the side that faces to the back of the PJ, or both sides of the filter?

I only vacuum the side to the back of the projector. I do this to remove the dust which the filter has trapped and can be easily removed. You have to realize that vacuuming will only remove a portion of the dust. What you don't want to do is to 'pull' any dust further into the filter where it might be later pulled completely through the filter into the projector.

I believe it's better to use a can of compressed air to blow the dust off. Blow from the front to the back.

I only vacuum the side to the back of the projector. I do this to remove the dust which the filter has trapped and can be easily removed. You have to realize that vacuuming will only remove a portion of the dust. What you don't want to do is to 'pull' any dust further into the filter where it might be later pulled completely through the filter into the projector.

dont have access to compressed air, but your vacuuming technique makes sense.
Cheers :)

dont have access to compressed air, but your vacuuming technique makes sense.
Cheers :)
If you have access to a car and a store, you can buy a can of compressed air. Or you can order online. Either way will work, but one is better than the other.

http://lh4.googleusercontent.com/public/w3A5T5EhLA_HQuWSOArpKiDY6S8JORbgjgrnfhwKMJ7My68tIhYkGBcsOj5k cgW8IgNSRU_R3624FdAsOGJA6Ochb14EjAXzaBMimjFi29TEapA0O6GbPdhI NK4bLkv_vunQ5bk-Sztyni-grqOrktwMnpJ5EJ2FPIVWyGh54XmbO-Xg0IxuUwXUbIctCvar7fhBz_0

The instructions specificlly say to use a vacuum. It works well for me.

I use the compressor in my garage...hit that baby with about 100psi and there ain't no dust left! LOL

I just got the bulb changed out. Putting my post together now with screenshots. Give me 20 min

tony

I use the compressor in my garage...Tony isn't that more-than-a-little risky? There are all sorts of contaminents in conventional air compressors. :eek:

As requested, here's my report and documentation of a new lamp replacement. I'm not a professional equipment reviewer, writer, videophile, or photographer. I'm sure the experiment is flawed in some way. But this is the every day Joe's impressions.

As background, my AE4000 is mounted 21' back from a 168" (14 foot) wide 2.35 screen. I employ the CIH method and do not use a lens. Screen material is a DIY screen using SeymourAV acoustically transparent fabric. I think it is roughly 1.1 gain. The room is 32'x17.5' x 9.2' and is painted very dark browns and reds with 100% light control. I had 2050 hours on the original lamp.

First, mechanically, the bulb change is very, very easy to do. I pulled the old lamp out and used my air compressor (at about 25psi) to gently blow all the dust out that I could get to. There was a reasonable amount of dust in the lamp chamber and cooling path. I also noted a bit of discoloration in the plastic directly closest to the lamp itself. I replaced with the new bulb and filter and hung the projector again.

Here's a photo of the old and new lamps together. The old bulb is on the left, new on the right. The only obvious difference was a dust accumulation on the metal screen of the old.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5484.jpg

And here's the lamp chamber that I also blew out. Taking some care to not blow dust into the body of the projector.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5487.jpg

Fantastic, Tony, thanks for the examination and pics.

I look forward to seeing how obvious, if even discernible, the before an after screen shots look using the exact same aperture, shutter speed, and ISO.

Take your time and do it right. Please don't rush.

On to the impressions. With 2050 hours on the old lamp, I expected great improvements in punch and brightness. There was improvement there, but it was only half of what I hoped for. All in all, the old bulb was still doing a fine job in brightness.

What I didn't expect that was immediately obvious, was improvement in sharpness and color. The image was far crisper and the punch I hoped for in brightness was showing itself in richer colors.

I took a few sets of before and after screenshots and hope that they might show what I'm describing, although, they don't capture it fully. I used the camera in full manual mode and used the same shutter, aperature and ISO for each before and after (although each set is different).

As expected, the after shots really aren't a pretty photo because they are overexposed. In reality, the afters look better in every respect. If you look at the amount of light on the ceiling, you can see the difference in shear output.

First, Avatar:

Before:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5475.jpg

After:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5489.jpg

Second, Kung Fu Panda:

Before:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5477.jpg

After:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5491.jpg

Third, Fifth Element:

Before:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5480.jpg

After:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z112/tragusa3/DSC_5492.jpg

This last set shows the brighter colors pretty well, in the red of the hats.

Hope this helps someone.

A secondary purpose of this post is that it illustrates my point regarding screen size. Even on the 2000 hour bulb, the projector does a fine job at lighting up a 14 foot wide screen. You'll see me in most of the screenshots. I'm 6'3" tall, so that helps give some scale to how large the image is.

Thanks for that "review" Tony. It was both interesting and informative. It's good to know, though, that the brightness of the bulb doesn't degrade THAT much even at 2000 hours of use.

Did you change the bulb because the projector was telling you to or just because you felt it was "time"?

I changed it because that is the recommended time from Panasonic. The projector does shut down at 2000 hours, but you can reset the timer and use the bulb as long as you'd like. I pushed my luck with a projector about 10 years ago and the bulb exploded and killed the entire projector. Didn't want that to happen again! :)

I changed it because that is the recommended time from Panasonic. The projector does shut down at 2000 hours, but you can reset the timer and use the bulb as long as you'd like. I pushed my luck with a projector about 10 years ago and the bulb exploded and killed the entire projector. Didn't want that to happen again! :)

Whoa, so that actually does happen in real life? :)

If I may ask, how far over the recommended replacement hours were you at when it exploded?

Those are some awesome before and after shots! And more proof the AE4000U can light up a huge screen, even after 2000 hours. Makes my 138", 10.5' wide scope screen seem puny. From one Tony to another...thanks!

I like the screenshots, very nicely done and nicely taken.

It would be interesting to also see fL readings however, as well as to note any calibration issues on those larger screens, just for the pickier people.
No doubt these newer projectors have better NEAR BEST MODES than older projectors to put out more lumens, but a best mode is still a best mode.

If choosing between two projectors, it's always advisable to look at professional review sites (www.projectorreviews.com), and note their comments on best mode lumens.

What I'm saying is, when it comes down to choosing two projectors, and one has better lumens for a best mode to a larger screen, this can be important too.
I'm not trying to disagree with anyone here, but the AVS guys themselves would say the same thing if you called them on the phone.

To my eye though, that looks like a good image for that large of a screen, it looks bright enough, but it's hard to tell from a screenshot.

It also looks like at least for his lamp, that the lumens drop-off is abnormally lesser than most projectors, which could allow bigger screens.
This varies from lamp to lamp though.

Laserfan, I've been using it for years for things like this and haven't caused any problems. Yes, canned air is safer. But I do what's reasonably easy for me.

zax, that was on a Plus Piano DLP projector. I wasn't too far over....just a few hundred hours.

Tony, thanks man. Alot of folks don't realize how exponential screensize is. You throw out a dimension, but really need to look in terms of square inches. That tells the whole story.

coderguy, I always use "Normal" mode. So, no it's not the best for other reasons, but it does give the light I need for the size. I've zoomed it down and used the Cinema modes. I'm not so sure that I like them better in any way. What's "correct" is not the same as a persons preference. For me, I don't feel I'm compromising anything in "Normal" mode.

Tony, that was fantastic! Thanks for the effort. It was great seeing it as recorded by the same camera settings since unlike us humans, the camera has perfect recollection, is unbiased, has no expectations, and makes a permanent record of its findings for our later comparison without the potential for the clouding of our memory.

Your post is, in my estimation, one of the most important of the entire thread.:)

I agree, it makes me feel MUCH MUCH better about my future setup. Now I just have to finish saving the needed cash and buy one.

You throw out a dimension, but really need to look in terms of square inches.For a screen that big, you might want to use square yards. :)

Thanks for all the info Tony. I have a 4K with about 2,300 hours on the original bulb (all of it on Econo mode). I'm probably going to replace the bulb in the next month or so, but your information makes me a little less concerned.

Thanks,
Mike

How would you use a foot-lambert-meter to measure the light output of a screen? Pointing toward the projector, or toward the screen where it will capture the actual reflexion?

How would you use a foot-lambert-meter to measure the light output of a screen? Pointing toward the projector, or toward the screen where it will capture the actual reflexion?

See link:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=755705

Another thing you can also do with a light meter is check different modes to see which ones are producing more contrast (although often your eye can tell as well).
Still, it's cool to have contrast readings.

Thanks. I used an old analog meter I borrowed from work. It's not very sensitive. I measured about 10 ft-l, which is exactly what the projectorcentral calculator had predicted!

The calculator takes into account the mode you use. I had 10 ft-l but switching to the Presentation mode doubles to 21 ft-l on the calculator.

At 10 ft-l, my meter needle was barely registering. This is a passive device.

What size is the monaural mini jack? I need to order a 35 foot one to run through my conduit incase I need it in the future.

Is there a way to check on your projector rebate status? I sent in forms for a free lamp and 2 year warranty. I figured there would be a website or such to verify that they received it and are processing it. I suppose they still have 4 weeks in the window.

What size is the monaural mini jack? I need to order a 35 foot one to run through my conduit incase I need it in the future.

3.5 mm

Is there a way to check on your projector rebate status? I sent in forms for a free lamp and 2 year warranty. I figured there would be a website or such to verify that they received it and are processing it. I suppose they still have 4 weeks in the window.

There is. I can't remember what it is maybe someone else will know it.

Is there a way to check on your projector rebate status? I sent in forms for a free lamp and 2 year warranty. I figured there would be a website or such to verify that they received it and are processing it. I suppose they still have 4 weeks in the window.

I'd like to know also, I'm at about 8 weeks on mine, sent in all the paper work in the middle of March.

I missed the cutoff for the free lamp by 2 weeks unfortunately, but I did still get a warranty extension. Of course, I have not received any information either after sending the forms in, but it's only been 2-3 weeks for me since I did. There is a phone number on the rebate form, maybe someone should try calling to check status?

866-795-3383

Glad the photos could be of help to you guys. Everytime I hear folks talking about my screensize being unacceptable, I fire up the Panny and look at images like those and think to myself....gee, I'm enjoying it! :)

Glad the photos could be of help to you guys. Everytime I hear folks talking about my screensize being unacceptable, I fire up the Panny and look at images like those and think to myself....gee, I'm enjoying it! :)

How close is your screen to the ceiling/soffit?

I am nervous to put my screen right up next to my soffit due to glare even though I have my ceiling painted flat black. Maybe some velvet will get rid of any glare?

My screen is 11' wide and it rocks!

Greg_mitch, I have my screen area about 7" down from a very WHITE ceiling and the reflection is not that bad at all. I believe with a black ceiling, you will have almost no glare issue whatsoever. See pic below for what I mean. Sorry for the average looking image, I took it with my phone. Man, my 138" screen seems small compared to you guys!

http://home.mchsi.com/~tsantanni/theater/ss1.jpg

Mine is only 5" below the soffit. The soffit is MDF painted in a very, very dark brown (flat). I'm not satisfied with the results though. You can see glare on it in my photos. I may very well end up with velvet over it.

I've seen a setup with ZERO glare on the front wall, and it makes a tremendous difference, that's my goal!

Tsantinni, I think if you could A/B compare yours, you'd find that your ceiling does have alot of light on it. I'd consider resolving that in some fashion. Try getting a black sheet and pinning it up as a temporary experiment.

Tsantinni, I think if you could A/B compare yours, you'd find that your ceiling does have alot of light on it. I'd consider resolving that in some fashion. Try getting a black sheet and pinning it up as a temporary experiment.
I got everything set up the way I want in here, but that false ceiling sucks. The wife would have a spaz attack if I put a black sheet on the ceiling, but I will try and find a permanent solution that she might like besides painting the tiles.

I think I'm learning from my setup that the sheen is still a problem for me, even with a dark color. Dark paint in a flat sheen is not doing the job for me. I'm now thinking that fabric is my solution.

I use the Avia Guide to Home Theater DVD for most of my display calibrations. The flashing hue and saturation boxes make it really obvious whether your tint and color are set correctly. Shortly after setting up the PT-AE4000U, I found that CINEMA1 mode was the most accurate in that it required the fewest color/tint adjustments (+2/+3). I just passed 450 hours on this bulb and pulled out the Avia disc to check my settings. To my surprise, the settings were quite a bit off in CINEMA1 mode to the point that I couldn't even get close to stopping the flashing in the hue/saturation boxes. So, I tried the other modes and found that CINEMA3 mode was dead on. There is no flashing at all - completely solid - and no adjustments necessary. Brightness and Contrast don't seem to have changed. Just sharing my experience at 450 hours.

Greg_mitch, I have my screen area about 7" down from a very WHITE ceiling and the reflection is not that bad at all. I believe with a black ceiling, you will have almost no glare issue whatsoever. See pic below for what I mean. Sorry for the average looking image, I took it with my phone. Man, my 138" screen seems small compared to you guys!

http://home.mchsi.com/~tsantanni/theater/ss1.jpg

FWIW, I was at a restaurant that had flat black ceiling panels and runners and a flat panel TV about the same distance to the ceiling as your screen is and those panels lit up comparably to what your photo shows. The runners really lit up brightly. One thing in your favor, I think, is that those ceiling panels are not that reflective compared to a lightly colored painted ceiling.

Do you feel that your image is washed out or at least has some loss in contrast...............are you happy? You could experiment with black fabric, as suggested, just to see how significant the improvement.

I'm researching projectors and screens now and I have a flat white ceiling and light colored walls (it's a family room and it will stay this way........good light control, though), so after reading many threads on this forum I'm kind of confused at what to do. I need to find some places with a normal living room environment to see how it looks.

I use the Avia Guide to Home Theater DVD for most of my display calibrations. The flashing hue and saturation boxes make it really obvious whether your tint and color are set correctly. Shortly after setting up the PT-AE4000U, I found that CINEMA1 mode was the most accurate in that it required the fewest color/tint adjustments (+2/+3). I just passed 450 hours on this bulb and pulled out the Avia disc to check my settings. To my surprise, the settings were quite a bit off in CINEMA1 mode to the point that I couldn't even get close to stopping the flashing in the hue/saturation boxes. So, I tried the other modes and found that CINEMA3 mode was dead on. There is no flashing at all - completely solid - and no adjustments necessary. Brightness and Contrast don't seem to have changed. Just sharing my experience at 450 hours.

This is interesting, as most often you only hear about the brightness that changes. Sounds like Panny's Red-Rich lamp color spectrum or intensity of some wavelengths relative to others are changing! Do you think there is a visible on-screen difference between Cinema 1 and Cinema 3 OR just that the settings are now in range?


Thanks,
Greg

This is interesting, as most often you only hear about the brightness that changes. Sounds like Panny's Red-Rich lamp color spectrum or intensity of some wavelengths relative to others are changing! Do you think there is a visible on-screen difference between Cinema 1 and Cinema 3 OR just that the settings are now in range?


Yes, there is clearly a difference when switching back and forth between modes, particularly evident in flesh tones.

For those interested in whether the VIP 3D product works with the AE4000, I've posted my results on the 3D Forum, VIP Displayer thread. The results were positive.

Hello, I'm fairly new to the projector world! I would love your help in deciding the measurements for the screen that I'm looking to use. YOUR HELP WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED:) My projector is located about 16'' from the screen wall at 6' from the floor on a shelf. I will be doing a scope painted (gray) screen. The size I'm currently using is a 140''. my current size is 129'' wide by 54'' tall. This is used in a basement with moderate light coming in from a windows that is on a East facing wall. The room size is 22.5 by 17.5 with a 9 foot ceiling. I'm aware that my current setup is not recommended due to distance and size (according to Projector Central), but I have been using this setup for months now and I'm very happy with the light output and picture quality. Thanks for your help!!!!!!!!!

Yes I'm using a PT-AE4000U.

Well guys after having this beemer in the box for the last 8 weeks or so, I finally set it up this weekend. The room is 95% complete, so I won't post any pics until it is 100%.
My room is modest compared to a lot of the theatres on here, but so far I'm happy with the results in a 12'x15' room that I managed to fit a 115" reference screen in, and can seat 6 viewers.
The audio isn't ground shaking, but more than enough for watching movies, and I would never see myself needing to crank it beyond what it can do.

More details later with the pics...

P.S. while I am more than impressed with the amount of customization the 4000 is capable of, I kind of expected more sharpness with 1080P source material. I'm pretty confident I have the focus dialed in accurately, but if anyone knows if it's possible to do any convergence adjustments, please let me know.
The screen is an excellent Elunision Reference screen, so texturing isn't an issue from the screen, I would just like to tinker with the convergence if possible to see if I can get it sharper.

Well guys after having this beemer in the box for the last 8 weeks or so, I finally set it up this weekend. The room is 95% complete, so I won't post any pics until it is 100%.
My room is modest compared to a lot of the theatres on here, but so far I'm happy with the results in a 12'x15' room that I managed to fit a 115" reference screen in, and can seat 6 viewers.
The audio isn't ground shaking, but more than enough for watching movies, and I would never see myself needing to crank it beyond what it can do.

More details later with the pics...

P.S. while I am more than impressed with the amount of customization the 4000 is capable of, I kind of expected more sharpness with 1080P source material. I'm pretty confident I have the focus dialed in accurately, but if anyone knows if it's possible to do any convergence adjustments, please let me know.
The screen is an excellent Elunision Reference screen, so texturing isn't an issue from the screen, I would just like to tinker with the convergence if possible to see if I can get it sharper.

Convergence may not be the cause of your issue (i.e. the issue of its sharpness being lower than your expectation). AE4000 is never commented as a very sharp projector.

For evaluating the convergence, try to get a calibration disc such as DVE HD, or a free AVSHD709 (you can download from here and burn a disc by yourself):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=948496

Use the convergence patterns there to check your convergence. However, you can't do anything about it because AE4000 does not have any setting for you to adjust the mis-alignment of the panels.

You can try to increase the Detail Clarify setting to +3 or +4 to see if this helps with the sharpness. You can use the calibration disc (either one of the above can do) to check if there is any ill effect when you increase the setting to +3 or +4 (and from there try to strike the balance between sharpness and noise).

Convergence may not be the cause of your issue (i.e. the issue of its sharpness being lower than your expectation). AE4000 is never commented as a very sharp projector.

For evaluating the convergence, try to get a calibration disc such as DVE HD, or a free AVSHD709 (you can download from here and burn a disc by yourself):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=948496

Use the convergence patterns there to check your convergence. However, you can't do anything about it because AE4000 does not have any setting for you to adjust the mis-alignment of the panels.

You can try to increase the Detail Clarify setting to +3 or +4 to see if this helps with the sharpness. You can use the calibration disc (either one of the above can do) to check if there is any ill effect when you increase the setting to +3 or +4 (and from there try to strike the balance between sharpness and noise).

Thanks, I'll download and run a test.
I'm already at +4.
It's too bad about the lack of alignment options. It makes running the test kind of moot (unless they are way out of wack... enough to exchange under warranty). I do suspect that the problem isn't a convergence issue... just a by-product of Panasonic's "smoothscreen" system.

There's a free light meter app on the iphone that measures FL. I saw they suggest using it on the Screen Innovations website. I didn't see any instructions on how to do the reading though.

Would I put the phone close to the screen and aim it back at the PJ to get the reading or sit in my normal seat and aim at the screen? None of the above? :D

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-light-meter/id381698089?mt=8

About the black ceilings too - Even in the nice theaters I've been to you can see glare on the black tiled or painted ceilings. Black velvet or velveteen is the only thing I've seen suck up all of the light. Velveteen is cheaper and seems less reflective.

I tried putting a 20" wide velveteen panel above my screen but didn't notice any real improvement in PQ. This stumped me. I remember Carada saying something about having the PJ above the screen will be better if it's close to a reflection point because more (not all) of the light will be reflected down. Eventually I'll put the panels back up because it looked cool but I'm in no rush since it looks fine without them.

BTW- great pics tsantanni and tony. And Tony thanks for sharing your bulb experience and taking time to do the A/B screenshots.

About the black ceilings too - Even in the nice theaters I've been to you can see glare on the black tiled or painted ceilings. Black velvet or velveteen is the only thing I've seen suck up all of the light. Velveteen is cheaper and seems less reflective.

I tried putting a 20" wide velveteen panel above my screen but didn't notice any real improvement in PQ. This stumped me. I remember Carada saying something about having the PJ above the screen will be better if it's close to a reflection point because more (not all) of the light will be reflected down. Eventually I'll put the panels back up because it looked cool but I'm in no rush since it looks fine without them.

BTW- great pics tsantanni and tony. And Tony thanks for sharing your bulb experience and taking time to do the A/B screenshots.
I've been racking my brain the last few days about what to put up there to reduce that reflection on the ceiling and now I am wondering if it's really worth it? It had to be wife friendly and not permanent also. I am happy with the PQ I have, I think I'd rather spend some time and money on some bass traps in those front corners and a 3 channel amp for the front soundstage.

Convergence may not be the cause of your issue (i.e. the issue of its sharpness being lower than your expectation). AE4000 is never commented as a very sharp projector.


I see this as a benefit, not a detriment. I don't like overly sharp images, like the kind you'd get with an LED flat-panel TV. Personal preference I guess.

I'll second that. Such a big screen should be compared to what you see in an actual theater, not to a 42 inches HDTV or a computer monitor. The lack of visible pixel pattern afforded by the Smooth Screen technology may initially appear as less sharp, but it's really a more natural image that is projected.

Also, confirm that the projector is receiving 1080P, I once had my BD player reset to 480P after a firmware update. Turn off any video noise reducer. Test with a sharp picture title, like The Internationnal.

Good luck!

zyad,

Initially, I too was a bit disappointed with the sharpness of mine. No matter how many times I fiddled with the default focus screens I could not get it to a level of sharpness that I had expected.

I have since found that I can get much better results by using an image from source disc to fine tune the focus instead of using the built in patterns.

This made all the difference and I was finally able to get the focus to the level that I was expecting and I am now very satisfied with the results.

zyad,

Initially, I too was a bit disappointed with the sharpness of mine. No matter how many times I fiddled with the default focus screens I could not get it to a level of sharpness that I had expected.

I have since found that I can get much better results by using an image from source disc to fine tune the focus instead of using the built in patterns.

This made all the difference and I was finally able to get the focus to the level that I was expecting and I am now very satisfied with the results.

Hi Brent, you mention setting focus with image from a "source disc". Which source disc would that be?

Thanks for the suggestion Brent. I'll give it a try tonight.
I didn't consider it, since I figured that the test pattern would be better (since they show the individual green pixels on black background).

I'll second that. Such a big screen should be compared to what you see in an actual theater, not to a 42 inches HDTV or a computer monitor. The lack of visible pixel pattern afforded by the Smooth Screen technology may initially appear as less sharp, but it's really a more natural image that is projected.

Also, confirm that the projector is receiving 1080P, I once had my BD player reset to 480P after a firmware update. Turn off any video noise reducer. Test with a sharp picture title, like The Internationnal.

Good luck!

I am definitely feeding it 1080P/24.
Regarding comparison to the smaller flat panels: I already know not to compare it to those, especially considering the difference in image size.
To compare my 115" screen to my family room 55" Sony TV is almost the same (proportionally over 4 times total screen area) to comparing DVD resolution vs. Blu-Ray resolution (4x total resolution in # of pixels).
So essentially, the "perceived" sharpness on my 1080P projector should be similar to watching a good quality DVD on a 55" flat panel TV, just at a much bigger scale.

The reason for my disappointment was based mainly on photos I've seen of other people's PQ with their setups, especially considering that quite a few of those were with screens that are supposed to be inferior to the one I have (as far as grain and texture are concerned).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not devastated by the PQ, I just thought it would look sharper.
Maybe when I have some eye candy video on it, I'll post some photos.

Hi Brent, you mention setting focus with image from a "source disc". Which source disc would that be?

Well, I used the term loosely. ;) I just meant that I used a video source instead of the test patterns. I actually used my Blu-ray of Kung-fu Panda and paused it at a few scenes where there was a lot of detail that could be picked out.
Probably not as "proper" as using a good calibration disc but I don't own one of them yet (actually ordered one on Friday so I should have it soon).

Thanks for the suggestion Brent. I'll give it a try tonight.
I didn't consider it, since I figured that the test pattern would be better (since they show the individual green pixels on black background).

Same here. Even after I get the paused Blu-ray image good and sharp, when I switch back to the the test pattern, it is still noticably blurry in comparison.

None of this makes sense to me and maybe it's just my projector, but it's almost as if the test patterns are in low resolution. :confused:

Well, I used the term loosely. ;) I just meant that I used a video source instead of the test patterns. I actually used my Blu-ray of Kung-fu Panda and paused it at a few scenes where there was a lot of detail that could be picked out.
Probably not as "proper" as using a good calibration disc but I don't own one of them yet (actually ordered one on Friday so I should have it soon).



Same here. Even after I get the paused Blu-ray image good and sharp, when I switch back to the the test pattern, it is still noticably blurry in comparison.

None of this makes sense to me and maybe it's just my projector, but it's almost as if the test patterns are in low resolution. :confused:

Oh ok, cool, thanks Brent. Yeah I ordered the Disney: WOW disc today, should get it soon...

Oh ok, cool, thanks Brent. Yeah I ordered the Disney: WOW disc today, should get it soon...

Same one I ordered. I've read good reviews of it and also that some of the shorts that are included are fairly entertaining to watch.

zyad have you toyed with the detail settings in the menu? A lot of owners bump it up a little for extra sharpness with no "noticeable" ill effects.

Yes I already had it bumped up a few notches (can't remember if it's at 3 or 4).
I'm going to try the DVE HD later, and also try to adjust the focus with a 1080P feed like Brent suggested.

Thanks! That's one of the most useful apps I've found in a few weeks! Quick Lux or FootCandle readings... (go to "i" and turn on "Display Additonal Info").

Just put the area you want to read out the info in the red center brackets, and it will give you the data in Lux or Foot-Candles (about a 10:1 ratio between the two). Proximity to the screen is important, just keep it the same with every reading. You can figure out how far away to stand so that the square box covers one foot square of screen, which for my iTouch, is about 8 feet distance from the screen. The bracketed area on the app is a slight rectangle, and not a square, hence you have to back up to about 8 feet to cover approximately one square foot of screen area (of a rectangle).

If I understand all this, and correct me if I'm wrong, the Foot-Candle reading should directly correspond to a Foot-Lambert. For calibrated home theater projectors, the the peak light output, or contrast setting, should adjusted to 16 foot-lamberts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-lambert) with a 100% white screen, or 14 ft-lamberts with a 95% white screen (or 5% grey).

Cheers,

Doc Rings

There's a free light meter app on the iphone that measures FL. I saw they suggest using it on the Screen Innovations website. I didn't see any instructions on how to do the reading though.

Would I put the phone close to the screen and aim it back at the PJ to get the reading or sit in my normal seat and aim at the screen? None of the above? :D

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-light-meter/id381698089?mt=8

I think you have a "super-large screen syndrome" and the inherent weakness of even 1080p is apparent at such a close viewing distance.

To compare your 55" TV to the 115" screen, you would need to be seated at least double the eyeball-to-screen distance to get the equivalent "Pixels per retina" ratio. Closer than that, and the pixels get larger in your vision, and any slight convergence errors (there are no perfect projectors in this regard), you will see them. To avoid "screen door effect", some projectors are slightly softened at the ideal focal length of focus, so as to not see them, unless you are really too, too close (less than 3 feet).

Did you use the online seating distance to screen size calculator to determine your ideal screen size for your viewing distance?

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

For a 115" screen, the THX ideal viewing distance for a viewing angle of 36 degrees is *no closer* than 12.9 feet, or for SMPTE viewing distance (30 degree viewing angle), no closer than 15.6 feet away.

I'd also not use online photos to "compare" sharpness...that is very artificial (small image size with small viewing angle, etc.)

Hope this helps,

Doc

I am definitely feeding it 1080P/24.
Regarding comparison to the smaller flat panels: I already know not to compare it to those, especially considering the difference in image size.
To compare my 115" screen to my family room 55" Sony TV is almost the same (proportionally over 4 times total screen area) to comparing DVD resolution vs. Blu-Ray resolution (4x total resolution in # of pixels).
So essentially, the "perceived" sharpness on my 1080P projector should be similar to watching a good quality DVD on a 55" flat panel TV, just at a much bigger scale.

The reason for my disappointment was based mainly on photos I've seen of other people's PQ with their setups, especially considering that quite a few of those were with screens that are supposed to be inferior to the one I have (as far as grain and texture are concerned).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not devastated by the PQ, I just thought it would look sharper.
Maybe when I have some eye candy video on it, I'll post some photos.

Yes Doc thanks for the input.
But in designing the room, I already used the 1.5 x Diagonal rule. The screen is 115", and the viewing distance is 14' so it's perfect.

What I would really like to do is find a source that is not film-like 1080p24. Does anyone know of a good video download (torrent/whatever), that is good quality 1080p60 (without overcompression/crush), with no grainy film effect? I would really like to try playing that to see how sharp the picture can really get.

Look for Pixar animations. Animations have no film grain, since they are 100% not real. I heard Kung Fu Panda is a great film to use for such things.

For a sharp but not grainy, you want Avatar! Maybe Gamers and District 9 too.

LOL funny you mention Avatar. I actually haven't seen it yet and it was going to be the first one I rent after I set up everything on the weekend, but the video store didn't have any available on the weekend.
I saw portions of it (a friends Blu-Ray RIP from a Torrent via his cheap little WD Media Player) on my 55" Sony LCD and even that looked amazing.

There's a free light meter app on the iphone that measures FL. I saw they suggest using it on the Screen Innovations website. I didn't see any instructions on how to do the reading though.

Would I put the phone close to the screen and aim it back at the PJ to get the reading or sit in my normal seat and aim at the screen? None of the above? :D

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-light-meter/id381698089?mt=8

Thanks! That's one of the most useful apps I've found in a few weeks! Quick Lux or FootCandle readings... (go to "i" and turn on "Display Additonal Info").

Just put the area you want to read out the info in the red center brackets, and it will give you the data in Lux or Foot-Candles (about a 10:1 ratio between the two). Proximity to the screen is important, just keep it the same with every reading. You can figure out how far away to stand so that the square box covers one foot square of screen, which for my iTouch, is about 8 feet distance from the screen. The bracketed area on the app is a slight rectangle, and not a square, hence you have to back up to about 8 feet to cover approximately one square foot of screen area (of a rectangle).

If I understand all this, and correct me if I'm wrong, the Foot-Candle reading should directly correspond to a Foot-Lambert. For calibrated home theater projectors, the the peak light output, or contrast setting, should adjusted to 16 foot-lamberts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-lambert) with a 100% white screen, or 14 ft-lamberts with a 95% white screen (or 5% grey).

Cheers,

Doc Rings

I started a thread in the Screen forum, inquiring on an iphone app for use as a lux meter, but got no hits:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1335090

The only app I knew about before the one you mentioned was the LuxMeter Pro. It got awful user reviews, so I didn't even download it.

Do you feel that the Pocket Light Meter app is accurate enough? Does the reading correlate to calculated values?

Thanks,
Greg

I have the 4000 mounted 1" within projected area, doing 120"diag zoomed. the throw distance is ~12'6" ceiling mounted.

So is it best to mount the projector level and use lens shift to bring it onto the screen or tilt the projector?

Also there are a lot of options with respect to shifting, masking, or other lens options? It's easy to figure out what they do but are there ones which should be left alone or not used for image quality?

BTW I was blown away with image quality on this thing. I thought I would be disappointed when the image was blown up this big!

use lens shift in all circumstances, if possible. avoid tilting the projector at all costs

Reluctantly, I replaced my venerable 900U with the 4000U, and have been very impressed with the new projector. I wanted to inquire if there are certain settings adjustments and respective levels that are more or less universally recommended for this projector (similar to settings in some BD/DVD players), such as set this parameter to this level, etc. This will provide a starting point from which I can fine tune later based on viewing experience and calibration discs. Thanks in advance.

use lens shift in all circumstances, if possible. avoid tilting the projector at all costs

I would think the opposite. Why is it better to use lens shift?

I would think the opposite. Why is it better to use lens shift?

Tilting produces keystone, very bad.

Set projector level, use manual lense shift to center 16:9 image on screen. Use electronic shift to center 2.35 image to screen for lense memory.

what's difference in manual vs electronic? how do you do it?

what's difference in manual vs electronic? how do you do it?

Manual and the knobs on the projector, you adjust the manually. Electronic is the setting in the menus for lense position, it is done with the remote electronicly.

I apogolize profusely for the following. I know that somewhere in the 240 pages of this thread I will probably find my answers but my eyes are getting tired!!
I am a real newbie so please understand that my questions are simplistic but I am afraid to make a mistake.
Here is my situation:
A local installer has suggested the Panny 4000 for my upcoming Home Theater and I am a little leery until I am sure that this will work.
Here are my details:
Screen that I am looking at: 2.35-1 Seymour A/T with a 1.2 gain - 115" wide
My questions:
1: What is the maximum distance back from the screen that I can mount the projector - lens to screen to obtain proper viewing. I am really new to this so maybe someone can show me exactly how the figures are attained.
2: How good is the Lens Memory feature and how does it compare to an Anamorphic lens.
thanks in advance

1: What is the maximum distance back from the screen that I can mount the projector - lens to screen to obtain proper viewing. I am really new to this so maybe someone can show me exactly how the figures are attained.
2: How good is the Lens Memory feature and how does it compare to an Anamorphic lens.
thanks in advance

1. You can check on Panasonic website to determine min/max throw distance for your screen size
http://panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/positions.html

2. You use Anamorphic lens together with the V-FIT mode to first sketch the 2.35:1 image vertically (digitally by the projector), and then sketch the scaled image horizontally (optically by the A-lens) to fill the 2.35:1 screen. The up-side of it is you gain more brightness by utilizing all the pixels of the LCD panel (vs. the case you use the Lens Memory to optically zoom it up to fill the 2.35 screen), but the down-side is that digital sketching may introduce scaling artifacts to the image.

I would think the opposite. Why is it better to use lens shift?

Lens shift is operated optically which, if using moderate amount, does not negatively affect the image quality. Tilting the projector will produce keystone, so you need to use keystone correction to digitally re-scale the image pixels to correct the trapezodal shape back to the rectangular shape. The digital scaling will produce less sharp picture as well as easily introducing other scaling artifacts (such as banding) to the picture.

If all those conditions are met, you're ready to set up lens memory:


Adjust the 16:9 image first using the manual dials on the case to position it, and using the zoom control to get the size right. It helps to put Post-It notes on the screen border so you can see the overlap.

Adjust focus using the ZOOM/FOCUS screen. Briefly tap the arrow buttons for fine adjustments; if you hold them down, they move rapidly. Finally, save your settings in a lens memory in the LENS CONTROL menu (name it 16:9).

Next load a 2.35 movie and adjust zoom/focus/position. In the ZOOM/FOCUS screen, press the ENTER button until the source video appears. Find a scene where all four edges of the image are bright. Use the V-AREA POSITION setting in the LENS CONTROL menu to move the image vertically. You may need to adjust the horizontal manual dial to center it horizontally, but don't touch the vertical dial. Save this in another lens memory (name it 2.35:1).

This can be an iterative process, you should go back and forth, loading 16:9 and 2.35 memory settings and making adjustments until both are perfect. But only adjust the vertical manual dial in 16:9 mode, and only adjust the horizontal manual dial in 2.35 mode.

Once 16:9 and 2.35 are done, you should create a lens setting for 1.85:1 aspect movies, and maybe a 2.20:1 setting for older 70mm movies.

If you want to use the AUTO SWITCHING function, select it, then select the 16:9 and 2.35:1 settings you created earlier, so it knows which lens memory settings to use. It will only switch between those two, you have to select other aspects manually.


Proper setup takes some time, but you only have to do it once. I did my AE4000 back in November, and haven't touched it since. Ask more questions if you have a problem.

I buy a Panasonic 4000 and a 2.35screen, I tried to be projected onto the screen format movies on 2.35 but I still see black bars on the outside of the screen, I tried to adjust the mask lectric but I still see a halo of light, what should I do? this halo is total removal to be completely dark? What am I doing wrong?

thanks for the help guys! I barely had enough zoom to get 120" 2.37 with 12'6" throw distance. actually the lens ran out right at my border....... Finally got it setup after much back and forth and even a omg moment when I thought I didn't have enough zoom.

Looks awesome!

I buy a Panasonic 4000 and a 2.35screen, I tried to be projected onto the screen format movies on 2.35 but I still see black bars on the outside of the screen, I tried to adjust the mask lectric but I still see a halo of light, what should I do? this halo is total removal to be completely dark? What am I doing wrong?

You have done nothing wrong! Most of us use a black velvet mask around the outside of the screen to hide those black bars. A mask of high quality velvet will make bright backgrounds of 16:9 menus unreadable. Also the screen wall should be painted a dark color if your mask is not as wide as the band area.

I have a wall of dark color (purple) and the screen that I bought has a black frame but not big enough to cover all the black band. So continue to see some of the bands do not? So I do not understand because they sell both the theme of the panasonic 2.35 if the only use he makes is the zoom ... If at least eelctrica masks were effective enough to cover the entire strip it, but in my case it is not, not if the remaining cases will be covered or not, what experiences you have on this issue?

I have a wall of dark color (purple) and the screen that I bought has a black frame but not big enough to cover all the black band. So continue to see some of the bands do not? So I do not understand because they sell both the theme of the panasonic 2.35 if the only use he makes is the zoom ... If at least eelctrica masks were effective enough to cover the entire strip it, but in my case it is not, not if the remaining cases will be covered or not, what experiences you have on this issue?

You can't get rid of the black bars. Electronic masking does not block the light going to the bars, all is does is make the image in that area as black as possible, and it is not possible to produce a true black. Sounds to me like your brightness is too high or contrast it off. I have black GOM on my screen wall and I have to really look hard to see where the black bars are against it. Nobody else sees it but me because I know what I am looking for, I never notice them when watching a movie.

I plotted my coordinates in the Projector Calculator and with a throw distance from lens to screen of 18 feet to a 2.35-1 screen the calculator states 9fl. Being new to this is this going to be a problem for me in a dark room with no ambient light?

I plotted my coordinates in the Projector Calculator and with a throw distance from lens to screen of 18 feet to a 2.35-1 screen the calculator states 9fl. Being new to this is this going to be a problem for me in a dark room with no ambient light?

No, you'll be fine with a 125" screen at that distance, even in eco bulb mode.

I plotted my coordinates in the Projector Calculator and with a throw distance from lens to screen of 18 feet to a 2.35-1 screen the calculator states 9fl. Being new to this is this going to be a problem for me in a dark room with no ambient light?

If it was me (and it was), I would place the projector as close to the screen as possible to minimize the zoom (and maximize the light output). If you start at only 9FL, that doesn't leave any room for what happens when the bulb starts dimming. I have a 125" 2.35:1 screen with 1.1 gain and get great brightness in a light controlled room with the projector at around 14' in eco-mode.

If it was me (and it was), I would place the projector as close to the screen as possible to minimize the zoom (and maximize the light output). If you start at only 9FL, that doesn't leave any room for what happens when the bulb starts dimming. I have a 125" 2.35:1 screen with 1.1 gain and get great brightness in a light controlled room with the projector at around 14' in eco-mode.
Agreed! I have a 138" screen and mounted the PJ as close as possible and still be able to fill the screen for scope content. I'm at 14'4" throw distance. It's very bright doing it this way even on eco mode and color 1. Good luck!

I plotted my coordinates in the Projector Calculator and with a throw distance from lens to screen of 18 feet to a 2.35-1 screen the calculator states 9fl. Being new to this is this going to be a problem for me in a dark room with no ambient light?

That was one of my big concerns, since I have a low ceiling. Putting the projector over the front seats makes it an annoyance for the rear seats. When I get far enough along (and save up enough money), I will be putting it at 17-18 feet, so it is over the rear seats.

Several people in this thread have theirs mounted that far away with no problems at all.

so would i be ok using this on my 170" screen from about oh say 15.5 feet back? i know i can right now with my mits hc5000bl... any ideas?

arc, look back a few pages and you'll see screenshots of mine with that size screen (and a 2000 hour bulb compared to new bulb). Make your own judgement. My projector is 19' back.

ya i saw that... 19 feet back huh? you using the zoom at all?

I'm somewhere in the middle of the zoom range. I can zoom smaller and larger.

so pretty much what your saying is that i should have no prob fillin mine from about 16 back

^

- how much gain is the screen?
- if high gain, how far off axis will there be people seating? [They don't get the full gain and potentially hot spotting and vignetting, too.]
- is the room totally light controlled or are there windows or lights on?
- will you be using Eco mode?
- how reflective are the other room surfaces such as ceiling/walls/floor (determines back scatter contrast loss, more of an issue for dimmer screens)
- how bright do you like your image?

Sorry, there is no simple "yes" or "no" answer for you, friend. You'll know if it is acceptable to you and only you, when you try it, since to some degree it is personal preference.

I answered most of those questions for "my room" earlier in this thread. My purpose in responding to these sorts of posts and for posting those screenshots earlier, was to make this a bit simpler. I don't think it's that complicated. 9 of 10 folks will be pleased with this projector whatever the size of screen chosen or the throw distance.

The specs that get tossed around here mean very little to the vast majority of potential owners. Look at my screenshots for instance. The video science community will tell me that it doesn't work and is not advised. I don't know...I rather enjoy it.

Not disrespecting the science. But I think there are many novice owners that hear the recommendations based on the science and then shy away from something they want. When they would actually be quite satisfied.

With my first projector (I'm now on my 4th), I experimented with image size for my room conditions and tastes by experimenting with simple household items like a white bed sheet tacked to the wall, (or black out cloth drapery liner, table cloth, foamcore, gator board, or even just a whit(ish) wall) to get a rough feel for what brightness to expect before I committed to a screen size, which I then built. I'm glad I did.

did a quick mesure... looks like im about 17'4" back...

I answered most of those questions for "my room" earlier in this thread. My purpose in responding to these sorts of posts and for posting those screenshots earlier, was to make this a bit simpler. I don't think it's that complicated. 9 of 10 folks will be pleased with this projector whatever the size of screen chosen or the throw distance.

The specs that get tossed around here mean very little to the vast majority of potential owners. Look at my screenshots for instance. The video science community will tell me that it doesn't work and is not advised. I don't know...I rather enjoy it.

Not disrespecting the science. But I think there are many novice owners that hear the recommendations based on the science and then shy away from something they want. When they would actually be quite satisfied.


ya man... very true they told me the same thing on my hc5000bl... its too big... blah blah but i love it i just want soemthing newer and better and badder im gonna go for it... i got some paint for the screen that will bring it to a 1.8 gain... then im not gonna run in eco mode... and see what happens... gotta do what YOU think is best :)

zillch, I absolutely agree with that! No way I'd buy or build a screen without having the projector in hand and experimenting on a sheet.

zillch, I absolutely agree with that! No way I'd buy or build a screen without having the projector in hand and experimenting on a sheet.

+2

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-kYWc9um1t2Y/TeAMifczoeI/AAAAAAAAEaM/jHjNO-3eD5c/s640/IMG_0078.JPG

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-yy2u2B2QI_8/TeAMkjYamQI/AAAAAAAAEbo/hDmJvFgJjnU/s640/IMG_0083.JPG

(130" wide image on Joanne's white bleached muslin, held up C clamps, from RS-20)

(130" wide image on Joanne's white bleached muslin, held up C clamps, from RS-20)Did you get the acoustically transparent C clamps?

;)

^LOL! :
---

I made a "temporary" screen out of BOC (black out cloth, discussed heavinly in our DIY screen forum) before I ordered and got my Damian AT celtic cloth that so blew me away I still have it. :o (although no speakers can be mounted behind it.)

ya... def goin with the panny thanks again guys!

Running a Panny ceiling mounted at 12'6" from a 115" 2.35:1 screen. I am pleased with this configuration. Plenty of zoom for CIH and plenty bright in Eco mode except when afternoon sun hits the windows. Blackout shades here I come.

Any Panny owners hear any word on whether or not they are releasing new models this year and if there will be a 3D version of the 4k?? I know its only June but I am trying to plan as my build continues. Thanks

Any Panny owners hear any word on whether or not they are releasing new models this year and if there will be a 3D version of the 4k?? I know its only June but I am trying to plan as my build continues. Thanks

Panasonic, like any electronics giant, is careful not to unveil new products until very close to shipment, so as not to cannibalize sales of older products. You won't hear rumors about features any earlier than the official announcement, unless WikiLeaks knows something. :p In the past the new AEx000 announcement has generally been at a trade show in September with first shipments in late October.

Before the earthquake, I would have thought an AE5000 introduction on that schedule very likely, since there was no new model last year, but who knows how events may have changed things?

I don't know if Panasonic will add 3D to the AE4000 successor or leave that feature to another product line--curious about that myself--but we probably won't know until September at the earliest.

We already know from Panasonic representatives (speaking prior to the tsunami, however) of not one, but rather two planned successors to the 4000. One will have 3D, the other wont.

Exact model numbers and prices are yet to be determined, but the ETA at the time of the interview was said to be this fall.

It would be nice if the non 3d version was using a 2.35:1 lcd panel.

I must say, unless I am not understanding all correctly, that I may have made a huge mistake purchasing the AE4000. I am building a CIH theater, and purchased this for the zoom memory feature. I think I just realized that in order for one to make effective use of the zoom memory, the AE4000 needs to positioned below the top of the screen??? This means I need a 2' downrod, and everyone in row 2 will smack their heads on the projector.

Please say it isn't so!!!

Yes the lens mist be inside of the projection area of the screen for the zoom memory feature to work without manual adjustment.

Based on your description, it would seem the screen is relatively low from the ceiling?

I must say, unless I am not understanding all correctly, that I may have made a huge mistake purchasing the AE4000. I am building a CIH theater, and purchased this for the zoom memory feature. I think I just realized that in order for one to make effective use of the zoom memory, the AE4000 needs to positioned below the top of the screen??? This means I need a 2' downrod, and everyone in row 2 will smack their heads on the projector.

Please say it isn't so!!!

It is so, but calm down--it's not a problem. See the replies to this post a few pages back...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20433984#post20433984

Thanks. Perhaps my anticipated screen placement is a bit low. Is there a rule of thumb for screen height? I was just vertically centering it with eye level of main seating position.

Also, the projector is at the front lip of my riser. I guess I could move it forward a stud pocket.... I am currently at about 16' for a 130" wide scope screen.

Thanks. Perhaps my anticipated screen placement is a bit low. Is there a rule of thumb for screen height? I was just vertically centering it with eye level of main seating position.Dunno about ROT, but my 120" scope screen is only 9' away, and the bottom edge of it is about at seated eye level. I'm sure you can move yours up then?

Is there a rule of thumb for screen height? I was just vertically centering it with eye level of main seating position.

Also, the projector is at the front lip of my riser. I guess I could move it forward a stud pocket.... I am currently at about 16' for a 130" wide scope screen.

A rule of thumb is that your eye should be about one-third of the way from the bottom of the screen. That may let you raise the screen a bit. Be sure to adjust for your eye, not anyone else's. :)

I have a 131" scope screen, 15' throw, looks fantastic. Like someone else mentioned, people don't even notice the projector unless someone walks in front of the screen. One woman thought I had an 11-foot plasma TV. :p

Thanks. I will experiment. I believe I can move the projector forward about 6 inches without a major hassle. This will get it completely off the riser. And most likely raise the screen some.

Or I could get a 140" wide screen to make the image taller :)

Or I could get a 140" wide screen to make the image taller :)
DING DING DING! Good plan...love my 138".

Or I could get a 140" wide screen to make the image taller :)

you got the room for it based on what I've seen on the build thread.

My 4000 arrived yesterday from Projectorpoint.com. I have to say working with this company was great. I ordered knowing it was out of stock, but they have the best price by over $100 so I could wait. Right after order I get an e-mail saying its out of stock, do i want to keep or cancel my order. I ask how long its going to be and it was under a week so I didnt mind. I get a few follow up e-mails letting me know the status and an e-mail when shipped.

Cant ask for better service!

A rule of thumb is that your eye should be about one-third of the way from the bottom of the screen.

I've read that many times and it makes sense for a standard room where people are sitting upright in front of a screen. In my setup, I watch from a reclined position and the natural direction of my eyes land much higher on the wall. I have my scope screen bottom about even with my eye level and that feels more natural to me. In fact, if the screen was at the normal 1/3 rule of thumb, I would be turning my eyes pretty far down. Just offering an alternate point of view.

...but my 120" scope screen is only 9' away...

How is that even possible? Panasonic says (http://panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/positions.html) that a 120" 2.25:1 screen cannot be placed any closer than 12.5'.

FYI... also think about speaker height... it's best to have the tweeters in the speakers at the viewer's ear level. So if you've positioned the speakers behind the screen that gives you one height --- if the speakers are below the screen that gives you a different height.
Just something to consider.

How is that even possible? Panasonic says (http://panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/positions.html) that a 120" 2.25:1 screen cannot be placed any closer than 12.5'.

He must be using an intermediate lens (anamorphic or short throw) my 115" is at 12'6". I could have gone a little closer but had to hit the beam with the mount. So the Panasonic info is correct.

How is that even possible? Panasonic says (http://panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/positions.html) that a 120" 2.25:1 screen cannot be placed any closer than 12.5'.

Probably seating position not projector position.

Probably seating position not projector position.Aha. You must be right.

Hi all,

I hate to ask a question that's already been asked, but at 241 pages, I just didn't have the few weeks to read through it all.

I found, at one point, a thread or link on how to properly set up lens memory for a 2.35:1 / 16:9 setup. There was an order on how to do it etc, would anyone have that handy?

I just set up the projector and a 130" 2.35:1 Monoprice screen. It looks incredible, but I have to keep playing with manual lens shift and zoom, and it's time to do it properly. :)

Thanks to anyone that can help.

:)
I found this when I was setting mine up...It's buried somewhere in the thread. If you use this it will work out... I had to set mine as 2.35 first and then set 16:9 to get the best results. You may also want to then create a 2.4 memory..


I cut and pasted it into a text file that I printed for reference...


"Here's a quick guide to setting up 16:9 and 2.35 lens memories for a 2.35 screen:

Level the projector.
Display some 16:9 content with bright edges. Zoom to the height of the screen. Use manual lens shift to center. Adjust Zoom/Focus and save in lens memory.
Display some 2.35 content with bright edges. Zoom to fill the width of the screen. In the LENS MEMORY menu, adjust V-AREA POSITION to center the image vertically on the screen. Adjust Zoom/Focus and save in lens memory.
If you cannot shift the image enough using V-AREA POSITION in the previous step:
Back off slightly on the V-AREA POSITION from the limit of 63 to give you room to adjust.
Use manual lens shift to center the image vertically.
Display some 16:9 content and reload the 16:9 lens memory you created earlier.
Use LENS MEMORY > V-AREA POSITION to re-center the 16:9 image. Continue with step 2 above.
As a final step you may want to set the UPPER/LOWER MASKING AREA for 2.35 and save it, this will prevent overspill when showing 2.35 content."

Just set up the projector and I am having trouble finding the 2.4 aspect settings.
Closest I have been able to come is H-fit and adjusting from there
Am I missing something?
Thx

Just set up the projector and I am having trouble finding the 2.4 aspect settings.
Closest I have been able to come is H-fit and adjusting from there
Am I missing something?
Thx
See the above post. It details exactly how to do it. There is no pre-created 2.4 aspect ratio, you have to zoom the projector to fill the screen. Follow the above instructions and it will work.

Just set up the projector and I am having trouble finding the 2.4 aspect settings.
Closest I have been able to come is H-fit and adjusting from there
Am I missing something?
Thx

There is no 2.4:1 aspect ratio in the AE4000.

If you're using 2.35:1 scope screen, use the Zoom to fill the scope image onto your screen (with the black bars overspill to the top & bottom of your screen).

If you're using 16:9 screen, you will see the top & bottom black bars (but you can adjust the V-AREA POSITION so that one big black bar to appear at either the top or the bottom).

See the above post. It details exactly how to do it. There is no pre-created 2.4 aspect ratio, you have to zoom the projector to fill the screen. Follow the above instructions and it will work.

Thx
Does it matter what aspect ratio the projetor is set to whey you start to make the 2.4 preset. H-fit, 16:9, etc

Thx
Does it matter what aspect ratio the projetor is set to whey you start to make the 2.4 preset. H-fit, 16:9, etc

You got to use 16:9 for the 2.35 zooming to work.

You got to use 16:9 for the 2.35 zooming to work.
Thanks very much
That is what I ended up with.
Now to get the settings in the Master remote
Love the projector so far

Hi all,

I hate to ask a question that's already been asked, but at 241 pages, I just didn't have the few weeks to read through it all.

I found, at one point, a thread or link on how to properly set up lens memory for a 2.35:1 / 16:9 setup. There was an order on how to do it etc, would anyone have that handy?

I just set up the projector and a 130" 2.35:1 Monoprice screen. It looks incredible, but I have to keep playing with manual lens shift and zoom, and it's time to do it properly. :)

Thanks to anyone that can help.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20261827#post20261827

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=20261827#post20261827

Thanks.

I gave it a try and for some reason I don't have enough play in the digital vertical control. Yet my lens is fully below the top of my screen. I'll have to keep playing with it...

Thanks.

I gave it a try and for some reason I don't have enough play in the digital vertical control. Yet my lens is fully below the top of my screen. I'll have to keep playing with it...

Did you level the projector--both front-to-rear and left-to-right? I used an 18" level to do the job when I first mounted my projector. Depending on your mount, this may be either a very simple process or an extremely frustrating process!

Getting the projector properly mounted and level is 95% of the job of getting the AE4000 setup to perform the push button 'zoom' from 16:9 to 2.35:1.

Zax
Level the pj

With all digital adjustments at zero proceed:

Using 16:9 material - zoom and use manual vertical adjustment ONLY to get the image to fill the screen from top to bottom only don't worry about horizontal center.

store position for 16:9

Then put on some 2.35:1 material and adjust Zoom and manual horizontal position ONLY, until image reaches the left/right edges of your screen.

Store position for 2.35:1

Load 16:9 and check it should be centered and good top to bottom.

Focus and re-save position.

Load 2.35:1 and check. Use digital vertical adjustment and masking if necessary.

Focus and re-save position.


This should cover it. If this doesn't work my guess is lens to screen distance may be the problem.

Anyone using a 140" wide scope screen with this projector?

Anyone using a 140" wide scope screen with this projector?

I'm using a 138" 2.35 on a 1.1 gain elite screen using the zoom feature.

If this doesn't work my guess is lens to screen distance may be the problem.

What would be the ideal position? I guess the best way of knowing would be as you mentioned, all digital and manual zoom to be set at zero and start from there.

Anyone using a 140" wide scope screen with this projector?
138" scope screen here and some in this thread have even larger than 140". I absolutely could not be happier with the screen size I went with.

138 wide, or diagonal?
Also, what is your throw?

138 wide, or diagonal?
Also, what is your throw?
Sorry, 138" diagonal and 14'4" throw. I know Tony123 on here uses a much larger than 140" wide screen. Search for his posts in this thread.

Zax
Level the pj

With all digital adjustments at zero proceed:

Using 16:9 material - zoom and use manual vertical adjustment ONLY to get the image to fill the screen from top to bottom only don't worry about horizontal center.

store position for 16:9

Then put on some 2.35:1 material and adjust Zoom and manual horizontal position ONLY, until image reaches the left/right edges of your screen.

Store position for 2.35:1

Load 16:9 and check it should be centered and good top to bottom.

Focus and re-save position.

Load 2.35:1 and check. Use digital vertical adjustment and masking if necessary.

Focus and re-save position.


This should cover it. If this doesn't work my guess is lens to screen distance may be the problem.

Thanks guys,

I think you guys are right about the levelling... I'm guessing even if it's tilting up by 5 degrees, it can make a huge difference once it reaches the screen.

I didn't have a chance to check the levelling last night -- I was busy making a little movie for my daughter, but I'll definitely check tonight.

I actually tried to do some lens memory settings, and haven't mastered the menus yet. Looks like there's a memory for regular projector settings and then another memory for lens settings right? Anyway, I'll figure it out tonight. :)

Thanks guys!

What would be the ideal position? I guess the best way of knowing would be as you mentioned, all digital and manual zoom to be set at zero and start from there.

I was just thinking the only thing left would be he didn't have enough zoom left to fill the screen if that basic set up didn't do CIH for him.

I was just thinking the only thing left would be he didn't have enough zoom left to fill the screen if that basic set up didn't do CIH for him.

Makes sense

I actually tried to do some lens memory settings, and haven't mastered the menus yet. Looks like there's a memory for regular projector settings and then another memory for lens settings right?

Yes that's correct. You make your lens adjustments on the "Lens Setting" page. That's the one that has zoom/focus, auto switching, H-Area position, V-Area position, etc. It also has entries for Lens Memory Load, Lens Memory Save, and Lens Memory Edit. Adjust the zoom/focus and other settings the way you want them, then select Lens Memory Save. You will then have a chance to select the slot and set a name. To restore these settings later you would choose Lens Memory Load and then the slot where you stored your settings.

For RS-232 control there is a command that can load any of the 5 lens memory settings. So if you are using an automation system you can create buttons that load each of the five settings. I went one step further and set up my automation system to consult the database when starting a movie and use the lens memory setting that is most appropriate for the movie's aspect ratio.

Yes that's correct. You make your lens adjustments on the "Lens Setting" page. That's the one that has zoom/focus, auto switching, H-Area position, V-Area position, etc. It also has entries for Lens Memory Load, Lens Memory Save, and Lens Memory Edit. Adjust the zoom/focus and other settings the way you want them, then select Lens Memory Save. You will then have a chance to select the slot and set a name. To restore these settings later you would choose Lens Memory Load and then the slot where you stored your settings.

For RS-232 control there is a command that can load any of the 5 lens memory settings. So if you are using an automation system you can create buttons that load each of the five settings. I went one step further and set up my automation system to consult the database when starting a movie and use the lens memory setting that is most appropriate for the movie's aspect ratio.

I LOVE that idea! I'm using a Crestron Prodigy system actually.

My question is, how does your automation system know what movie is playing? I guess it's doable with recorded digital media (MKV, etc), but what about optical media? Please share, very cool idea!

Anyone using a 140" wide scope screen with this projector?

I'm using a 140'' size scope screen. 129''x54''. Image is still displayed on the wall , about to use the MAXMUDD paint formula to do a gray screen. Distance from projector is about 16' placed on a shelf 6' from floor on opposite wall. Normal eco-mode.

I LOVE that idea! I'm using a Crestron Prodigy system actually.

My question is, how does your automation system know what movie is playing? I guess it's doable with recorded digital media (MKV, etc), but what about optical media? Please share, very cool idea!

I'm using Cinemar for my automation system. It prescans all the discs in my Sony CX7000ES and builds its own database with information from AMG (including the disc's slot number). When I add a new disc to the player I have it perform an AMG lookup to add the information to the database. Usually it gets the right ascpect ratio, but sometimes I have to fix it up by hand. To play a movie I go to a page that lists the movies (either by title or by cover art), pick one and select "play". It does the rest. And yes it is easy to populate a database from movies ripped to hard disk as well.

I am still in the process of putting together a comprehensive description of my theater for my blog, including a description of the automation system. Sorry it isn't done yet or I could point you to it.