JVC loves using Studiotek 130 to show off their projectors. That specific material produces some really nice images!

Benito

Certainly does.

After several months of research I am finally ready to begin construction.
My theater will be 16'wide and 24' deep 7'8" height
Walls & carpet Burgundy, Ceiling grey
I will be purchasing a Firehawk AT and Epson 8700 (possible Panny4000)
I want the largest 2.4 aspect possible so I can have the largest possible 16:9 image when watching sports as well.
I will have 2 rows of seats: 12' and 18' (on a riser)
How close to the ceiling and or the floor is to big?
Unfortunately there is a soffit across the front of the room and the screen needs to be below this
A 120" screen leaves me ~3.5" from the soffit and 30" from the floor
A 133" screen would likely have the frame on the soffit and be ~22" from the floor. I think this is likely to big. Do I need to go even smaller than the 120"?
I was thinking of 10-12" in front of the speakers. Would this be OK for this type of screen?
Thanks for any guidance

The 120" diagonal is definitely not too big! at 30" from the floor you will be in good shape although I would highly recommend you lay it out on the wall with tape or something similar so that you can get an idea of how it will look from the second row. Also, field of view comes into play as well.

10-12 inches from the screen should be ok. I think Stewart recommends 11" from the screen so you are actually in perfect shape!

If you like, contact anyone from the sales team to provide you some great pricing!

Benito

What a surprise. Fraisa putting the BD screen into another thread....

You forgot to mention those shots were done with ambient light directly hitting the screen, which obviously favor the BD screen.

However, for someone who wants to be able to watch their projected image with some lights on there are various ways of going about achieving that goal. If you don't want to invest any energy in intelligently setting up your room, you can instead invest more of your money in a specialty screen like the Black Diamond, which does some of your work for you. Although at some price...in terms of hotspotting, screen texture, and in the case of the .8 gain version, generally being relegated to small screen sizes due to the low gain effect on image brightness.

Another way of skinning that cat is just paying attention to how you set up your room and system. Keep your screen area darker than the area you want lit up, which is typically were you are sitting. No screen looks better with light shining directly on it, whether you are talking a Black Diamond or a white screen, so light shining over or on the screen isn't something you want in the first place.

My lighting is set in zones so I simply have the lights off over the screen, but lights toward the middle of the room back to the sitting area can remain on, with an extremely vivid image left on the projection screen. (Frankly, more vivid than I've seen with the BD screen in ambient light).

I have yet to take screen shots with an eye to showing actual image quality. I just snapped a few for my build thread showing different screen sizes. But I left the lights on in the room, except over the screen, and you can see what I mean about how the image still looks clear and rich, with good contrast:

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/5183/93932.jpg

http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/2272/avatartank1224063.jpg

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8748/lotrlakewide3991.jpg

What projector are you using?

Need some advice,

Thinking of going with an 82 inch fixed 130 G3 and the Panny 4000. Also, have the option of the Panny VT30/65 plasma. For starters, which one would you pick?

The setup will be in a finished basement. I am currently using a Pioneer 60 inch plasma there on a stand and it works great. It is being relocated to another room though. The basment area only has the standard default basement windows on either side wall; otherwise, the room is dark at night. During day, if sunny outside or light clouds, it's not completely dark. I don't really want to cover the windows though. It's not high ceilings as it's a basement so standard 8 foot ceiling (maybe slightly less since it's basement). Viewing distance is about 12 feet but the current Pioneer 60 looks good on a stand. A mounted fixed screen will recess back when on wall so I don't imagine it would be too big based on viewing distance. Could I go bigger or would I want to? I guess a standard black frame from Stewart is best?

What about Panny 4000? It will hitting the screen from about 14 to 16 feet away and mounted on the low ceiling. Is there a distance/height restriction(s) when going with a projector/screen? Any other projector, within this price range, that you would consider?

Finally, would you consider the Panny VT30/65 plasma at all versus the Panny 4000 and Stewart 130? Don't really care about 3D now but would still be neat to have. Would I compromise anything else?

MStanic, can you please confirm what the seating distance will be from viewer to screen? I know you mentioned it is currently 12' but just wanted to make sure it's 12' for the projection screen as well.

Benito

What projector are you using?

JVC RS20. About 3 years old now.

With the screen on the wall, the viewing distance probably increases by about 2 or 3 feet from where the current Pioneer plasma sits on the stand. That would make the viewing distance from the sweet spot around 10 to 12 feet away for sure. The projector would sit about two feet back from this main viewin area. I would have to measure at home tonight to be totally accurate but that's pretty close. What are your thoughts/concerns?

My only concern is that you are going too small on the image. Even if you are not a fan of a arge image, I would still recommend you go larger. If you are going to be roughly 11' from the screen, an 82" diagonal is cutting you a bit short. I would recommend a 92" diagonal at the very least.

my opinion, go with the projector set up over the plasma.
If you stick with the 82" diagonal, i would consider the Greyhawk material over the ST13. If you plan on bumping it up a bit, then you could stick with the ST130 and get a very nice image. Price difference between the two is small.

As far as projectors, take a look at the epson 8700. It will provide a better overall image than the Panny. Only reason I would choose the Panasonic over the Epson is if you really need the memory presets that it provides.

Benito

Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.

Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.

My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.
Hibo

Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.

Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.

My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.
Hibo

Very Good advice....

Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.

Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.

My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.
Hibo

hmmm.....that's interesting advice.
I've never heard people suggest going with image width and height over diagonal when speaking of sizes. I've heard people use those dims to calculate seating distance and a few other things but not when referring to images.

In the years that i've been doing this, i've only had people use the image width over diagonal when working with native 2.35 screens.

Not saying that you are wrong or right, just that i've never heard it said like that before.

Either way.....good advice on the image size!! If I were designing his room or recommending things, i would go a little bigger than 82" diag.

Benito

Hi,

I know you recommended the Epson over the Panny projector but if I stay with the Panny (as this is my current choice) will the Panny give me just as good a display on the 82 as it will on the 92 ST130 G3. Don't you have to have very high end projectors as the screen gets bigger diagonally? Should I be purchasing a 2.35:1 screen or a 16:9 screen when using the Panny? This is a dedicated HT room but there will be regular TV viewing as well.

What HDMI cable should be used with the Panny as far as protocol/standard? I assume HDMI 1.3? How many HDMI cables should be ran back from the projector to my Preamp/Anthem D2V?

Are there any 3D projectors available yet worth looking at? I don't have any experience with screen/projector so please bear with the excess questions.

Hi,

I know you recommended the Epson over the Panny projector but if I stay with the Panny (as this is my current choice) will the Panny give me just as good a display on the 82 as it will on the 92 ST130 G3. Don't you have to have very high end projectors as the screen gets bigger diagonally? Should I be purchasing a 2.35:1 screen or a 16:9 screen when using the Panny? This is a dedicated HT room but there will be regular TV viewing as well.

What HDMI cable should be used with the Panny as far as protocol/standard? I assume HDMI 1.3? How many HDMI cables should be ran back from the projector to my Preamp/Anthem D2V?

Are there any 3D projectors available yet worth looking at? I don't have any experience with screen/projector so please bear with the excess questions.

Not sure if I'm the best person to help since my theater is still under construction. I am waiting on a Studiotech 130 G3 120" and a Panny 4000. Went back and forth between this and the Epson 8700 for more than a month. While I preferred the Epson in most ways, I picked the Panny for the motorized zoom and memory presets. I will be mounting the projector on the ceiling and this was a major difference between 2 projectors that are very similar in may ways. Probably would have gone with the Epson if I was not mounting it on the ceiling. I did a great deal of research and came to the conclusion that this projector would work well with the ST 130 but as I said I don't have it yet so I hope I was right:). I went 2.4 because I really wanted the CinemaScope effect. At 120" the screen will still allow for a pretty big picture when viewing sports, etc in 16:9. If your screen is 82" and you go 2.4 you may. not be happy with the size of a 16:9 image. It really depends upon your taste and what type of content you will be watching most. As for the cables, I always have extra when I am running through walls, ceilings. I put a few CAT6 cables up there as well. You never know...

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.

What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.

What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.

16:9 gives you an aspect ratio of 1.78. A 1.78 screen is 1.78" wide per 1" of height and a 2.4 screen is 2.4" wide per 1" of height. I found that most (not all) of the newer movies I like are CinemaScope 2.4 aspect. I went with a 2.4 screen so these movies would fill the screen as large as possible. A 2.4 aspect screen that is 120" wide would be 50" high. When watch a movie it will fill this screen. When I watch TV (HD 16:9) which would be 1.78 aspect I will be limited by the height if my screen. The picture will still be 50" high but it will only be 89" wide (50 x 1.78). The screen is still 120" wide so there will be 15.5" black bars on either side of the image. Whichever aspect screen you choose you will have some "dead space" when watching content which is in a different aspect. What I liked about the Panny 4000 is that you can zoom and focus when you switch from one source to another with the remote rather than adjusting the projector directly. It even let's you save settings so you can have one for 2.4 and one for 1.78. This way you just press a button and the projector will adjust for the content you are watching. As best I can tell it was the only projector in this price range with this feature. I don't have any knowledge of the Sony you mention

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.

What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.

to be honest....i don't think there's much of a comparison between the Pro1 and the Panny 4000. The Pro1 is an all around better projector. But it should be for the difference in price.
Sony just had a price increase on the Pro1 so if you can find it for the old price, i'd jump on it.

Benito

Okay, the biggest I can go with is 92 inches and I will be using the Panny 4000. The room is painted a dark chocolate Benjamin Moore French Press color with the ceiling being a ligther Coastal Path tan/beige. The ligthing is controlled but some light will get in from the basement windows during the day. The projector will be about 14 feet from the screen.

Is the StudioTek 130 G3 still the one to go with?

Paint the ceiling darker, invest in blackout curtains, and the 130 will be perfect.

Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?

Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?

Here's my experience with the ST130G3. When I first got my projector, a JVC RS40, my HT room was all painted dark brown with dark carpet etc... Perfect colors (short of black) for a HT. The room has 3 faily large windows with 2" wood blinds. Until I installed blackout curtains a fews days after, the room was NOT usable during the day.

My own experience.

Highly recommend the Firehawk material over anything else.

The Studiotek would be great but as zbroke mentioned, you would really need to get that room as dark as possible.

We are authorized Stewart dealers so if you are interested in pricing, feel free to contact us!

Benito

Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.

Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?

Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.

Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?

Buddy of mine has the Firehawk G3 material but with the Panny 3000. Looked pretty good in his living room.

Any specific questions?

Benito

Just wanted to make sure my dealer was recommending the Firehawke and not the Grayhawke. Would the Grayhawke work also? What's their difference?

Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.

Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?

Get samples. I find the Firehawk material to not have the gain claimed for many installs. In most ceiling mount situations the StudioTek 130 will be much brighter..

Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?

I understand what you mean and then I'd recommend you dont compromise by getting the studiotek. The nice gain and lambertian surface will just mean you wash our your image in a room with ambient light and a bright ceiling.

At the size you are talking about, assuming a ceiling mounted projector, the firehawk gain should be fine.

Samples are useful but can be hard to use objectively.



Here's my experience with the ST130G3. When I first got my projector, a JVC RS40, my HT room was all painted dark brown with dark carpet etc... Perfect colors (short of black) for a HT. The room has 3 faily large windows with 2" wood blinds. Until I installed blackout curtains a fews days after, the room was NOT usable during the day.

My own experience.

+1

Hi Guys
I am looking for a 135" elctric screen (LuxusA) if anybody knows where I can find the best deal
Thanks

Hi Guys
I am looking for a 135" elctric screen (LuxusA) if anybody knows where I can find the best deal
Thanks

Have you tried us yet?
Feel free to contact us, we can help!

Benito

Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.

Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?

I went back and forth as well. Just put up a Studiotech AT 127" with the panny 4000 ceiling mounted. I have 2 rows of seats 12' & 18' away. Each row has 2 high hats with 120 watt bulbs on dimmers. Watch the Yankee game with lights on ~50% and the image was amazing. I could have had the lights on brighter if I chose.
I'm very happy with my choice over the FH or BD given my set up. No windows, light control. My only hesitation on the ST was the ability to keep some light on when watching sports etc. In my current set up it is no problem at all

Have you tried us yet?
Feel free to contact us, we can help!

Benito

I would definitely recommend working with Benito. Great price, even better service

I went back and forth as well. Just put up a Studiotech AT 127" with the panny 4000 ceiling mounted. I have 2 rows of seats 12' & 18' away. Each row has 2 high hats with 120 watt bulbs on dimmers. Watch the Yankee game with lights on ~50% and the image was amazing. I could have had the lights on brighter if I chose.
I'm very happy with my choice over the FH or BD given my set up. No windows, light control. My only hesitation on the ST was the ability to keep some light on when watching sports etc. In my current set up it is no problem at all

I agree with this statement. Lighting on dimmers, as long as it doesn't project directly on the screen is ok (to a certain degree). Daylight however is a killer.

I'm not sure if this has already been asked, but I'm curious if a Firehawk g3 will be compatible with any of jvc's newer 3d projectors. I saw someone comment it wouldn't be an issue with the ST130 and although I won't be changing out pj for awhile, I really don't want to replace the screen material.

I'm not sure if this has already been asked, but I'm curious if a Firehawk g3 will be compatible with any of jvc's newer 3d projectors. I saw someone comment it wouldn't be an issue with the ST130 and although I won't be changing out pj for awhile, I really don't want to replace the screen material.

Stewart is coming out with a high gain screen that would be better in 3d.

Stewart is coming out with a high gain screen that would be better in 3d.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/residential/materials/3d/silver5D_residential.html

They recently came out with the new 5D material which is geared for 2D and also passive 3D.
If you are worried if the Studiotek 130 will work with 3D, you are ok. If you are asking about a new skin for your existing frame, you can look into the Firehawk LS material....better for 3D than the Firehawk G3.

Benito

I have lived happily with my Firehawk 92" Horizonal Electrimask (maybe G2) for 5 years until I move to my new house with bigger room W15' x D22' x H9.5'. The screen seems to be too small and I plan to replace it with 110" size. My current projector is JVC RS-20. I built RPG diffusor on the Front wall for 2-channel optimization, so I cannot use fixed/on-wall screen. The room tone color is in dark Grey both wall and ceiling. Only 1 window which has the double curtain to control the light.

This is my 1st time to change the screen, so I don't have much experience on it and looking for the right screen:
- I can't live without electrimask for 2.35:1 movie
- I plan to replace my projector with JVC RS-60 or new gen next year.
- I may sometimes watch 3-D movies after changing the projector.
- Should I stay with Firehawk model like G3 or change to StudioTek130 G3 or any other screen models?

Many thanks for any suggestion.

I have lived happily with my Firehawk 92" Horizonal Electrimask (maybe G2) for 5 years until I move to my new house with bigger room W15' x D22' x H9.5'. The screen seems to be too small and I plan to replace it with 110" size. My current projector is JVC RS-20. I built RPG diffusor on the Front wall for 2-channel optimization, so I cannot use fixed/on-wall screen. The room tone color is in dark Grey both wall and ceiling. Only 1 window which has the double curtain to control the light.

This is my 1st time to change the screen, so I don't have much experience on it and looking for the right screen:
- I can't live without electrimask for 2.35:1 movie
- I plan to replace my projector with JVC RS-60 or new gen next year.
- I may sometimes watch 3-D movies after changing the projector.
- Should I stay with Firehawk model like G3 or change to StudioTek130 G3 or any other screen models?

Many thanks for any suggestion.

Will your speaker placement require you to do microperf?
With that room, i guess it all comes down to how much light you can eliminate from coming through that window. If you can get most or all of it, definitely go with a Studiotek 130. If a lot of light is coming through, go with the Firehawk G3.

Benito

Will your speaker placement require you to do microperf?
With that room, i guess it all comes down to how much light you can eliminate from coming through that window. If you can get most or all of it, definitely go with a Studiotek 130. If a lot of light is coming through, go with the Firehawk G3.

Benito

My Maxx2 is placed on the side and around 3' in front of the screen. I am quite concerned about sound set up and my current speaker placement would allow 110" max but not sure if microperf is required or not.

The double curtain could eliminate over 95% of the light (just small glimpse underneath the curtain).

Just notice the new Silver 5D model good for both 2D and 3D.
Would that be an interesting choice if I watch 3D sometimes?

I would suggest you get some samples. Me personally, i would recommend the Studiotek 130 for your application but without personally being there, it's hard to make a firm recommendation.

The Silver 5D material is amazing if you are doing standard 2D and passive 3D. So it really depends on what type of 3D you will be using.

Benito

Anyone got any info besides what is shown on the Stewart site on the new Reflections Active 3D screen. I'm trying to select (been trying for 6 months now :) ) around ~110 inch fixed screen for my new full batcave theater. I'm already in 3D age with my DLA-X3 projector so I'm looking for the best 2D/3D combo screen there is so high polarization preservation would be very nice.

This new screen sounds quite interesting (I was torn between Silver 5D and ST130 before this), but atm even the minimum projection distance is not available. The 1.7 gain also sounds nice, would boost JVCs brightness without high lamp mode. I'm quite allergic to visible screen coating/texture, anyone seen this screen in dealer demo or similar? I've been asking for samples for current generation of ST130 and Silver 5D from my local dealer but it seems to take ages to get anything on this side of pond.

Anyone got any info besides what is shown on the Stewart site on the new Reflections Active 3D screen. I'm trying to select (been trying for 6 months now :) ) around ~110 inch fixed screen for my new full batcave theater. I'm already in 3D age with my DLA-X3 projector so I'm looking for the best 2D/3D combo screen there is so high polarization preservation would be very nice.

This new screen sounds quite interesting (I was torn between Silver 5D and ST130 before this), but atm even the minimum projection distance is not available. The 1.7 gain also sounds nice, would boost JVCs brightness without high lamp mode. I'm quite allergic to visible screen coating/texture, anyone seen this screen in dealer demo or similar? I've been asking for samples for current generation of ST130 and Silver 5D from my local dealer but it seems to take ages to get anything on this side of pond.
The Reflections Active 170 3D would be your best choice for both 2D and 3D imaging. The Silver 5D is for passive 3D and your JVC DLA-X3 is active using shutter glasses.

The Reflections Active 170 3D would be your best choice for both 2D and 3D imaging. The Silver 5D is for passive 3D and your JVC DLA-X3 is active using shutter glasses.
That follows my thinking too, but details on the characteristics of this new material are still a bit lacking. I mean things like
- what is the minimum throw distance?
- any drawbacks if projector is ceiling mounted eg. around top or a bit above screen?
- is it already available/shipping?

Just trying to figure out if this material is worth waiting/suitable for my environment (throw distance 1.7 x screen width, ceiling mounted projector...)

That follows my thinking too, but details on the characteristics of this new material are still a bit lacking. I mean things like
- what is the minimum throw distance?
- any drawbacks if projector is ceiling mounted eg. around top or a bit above screen?
- is it already available/shipping?

Just trying to figure out if this material is worth waiting/suitable for my environment (throw distance 1.7 x screen width, ceiling mounted projector...)Reflections Active 170 3D is similar to most elevated gain screens; longer throws really help with minimizing hot spotting and maximizing center to edge uniformity.

The longer the throw, the more collimated the projected light is and the smaller the standard deviation of incident angles. This results in better image uniformity.
Reflections Active represents what Stewart Filmscreen feels is an optimum balance of light recovery for insertion loss, while retaining a functional half gain performance with 'normal' lenses. 1.5:1 throw distance would be a functional minimum, but the display quality will benefit a lot from longer focal lengths when possible.

Reflections Active is a great performer with high mounted projectors. The behavior of the material is to distribute light within it's stated off axis performance, along an angular reflective path. So a high mounted projector will tend to deliver light centered slightly lower than the angle of incidence. Reflections active is not retro-reflective like glass bead screens, which benefit from lower projector mounting options.

It's always good practice to keep the projector within the upper and lower limits of the screen's top and bottom sight lines when possible. Extreme mounting positions, result in the need to use digital anti-keystone utilities that have highly deleterious effects on image fidelity. Many projectors now have highly functional lens shift options, but not all are equal, and some extreme settings may affect brightness uniformity, increase chromatic aberration artifacts, and result in geometry distortions.

Reflections Active is shipping at the end of September 2011, and will be available in all of Stewart's mounting systems, fixed frame, electrically operated drop down, with or without masking. The material can be either Micro-Perforated or Cinema Perforated upon request.

Question. If I were to look at the surface of a studiotek 130 screen how would I be able to tell if its the G3 vs. the earlier version?

Thanks.

Question. If I were to look at the surface of a studiotek 130 screen how would I be able to tell if its the G3 vs. the earlier version?

Thanks.

without experience it would be hard to tell. I can tell you that the G3 version is much much smoother than the previous generation but without experience of the G2 version, you have nothing to compare it to.

I don't even think you'd be able to get a sample of the older version.

If it feels really rough, it's the old version. If it feels smooth, you're working with the G3.

benito

Talked my local vendor about Reflections Active 170 3D and it seems over here it will take several months, maybe until Q1/2012 before we're gonna see actual screens at this side of Atlantic. I'm a bit tempted to wait and use a cheap screen as a place-holder for some months (as I was super happy with my Greyhawk Electriscreen in my old short throw living room setup), but info about polarization retaining characteristics with screen this seems to be nowhere to be found. I mean if this screen retains significant amount of polarization with 1.7 gain it will be perfect for active 3D with for example my JVC DLA-X3. Even the gain layer in the Grayhawk had a huge effect on the 3D brightness due to polarization retained.

However, if the 1.7 gain is alone supposed to increase 3D brightness enough then I might as well get 1.2-1.3 gain screen with some polarization retention for equal brightness without having to wait near half-a-year.

Anyone any info about this? Any news about sample availability? It would be perfect if a sample would be tested and info added to "Screens for 3D Projection" thread. Getting any samples in Europe seems to be nearly impossible :(

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1300238

without experience it would be hard to tell. I can tell you that the G3 version is much much smoother than the previous generation but without experience of the G2 version, you have nothing to compare it to.

I don't even think you'd be able to get a sample of the older version.

If it feels really rough, it's the old version. If it feels smooth, you're working with the G3.

benito

Thanks for the reply. I will check the smoothness or lack there of. I have recentley purchased a pre-owned, but never mounted, ST130 and there is some confusion, from the folks at Stewart as well, as to whether it is G3 or the former version of the 130.

To that end I did my projector calculations using the Stewart website which has data for the ST 130 G3, it seems, through reading completely through this thread, that the minimum throw distance for the ST 130 is 1.4 times width versus 1.3 times the width for the G3 material. I should be ok, if these numbers are accurate, but am just a foot inside the minimum with my short throw Marantz VP4001 projector.

Can anyone here confirm the 1.4 figure I mentioned above? Thanks, I know I can always phone Stewart if need be but thought I'd check here first.

Thanks again.

Thanks for the reply. I will check the smoothness or lack there of. I have recentley purchased a pre-owned, but never mounted, ST130 and there is some confusion, from the folks at Stewart as well, as to whether it is G3 or the former version of the 130.

To that end I did my projector calculations using the Stewart website which has data for the ST 130 G3, it seems, through reading completely through this thread, that the minimum throw distance for the ST 130 is 1.4 times width versus 1.3 times the width for the G3 material. I should be ok, if these numbers are accurate, but am just a foot inside the minimum with my short throw Marantz VP4001 projector.

Can anyone here confirm the 1.4 figure I mentioned above? Thanks, I know I can always phone Stewart if need be but thought I'd check here first.

Thanks again.

Get the serial number of the existing screen, i can find out for you with that if it's the G2 or G3 version.

What image size are you going with? How far back are you putting the projector?

Benito

Get the serial number of the existing screen, i can find out for you with that if it's the G2 or G3 version.

What image size are you going with? How far back are you putting the projector?

Benito

That's kind of you, thanks. I will pm you the serial number but will need to dig it out/up.

The screen size is 110" diagonal with my Marantz showing a max throw distance of 12'7". (this is from the Marantz manual as well as projector calc.)

If the older 130 material is 1.4 times width that would call for a minimum throw distance of a hair under 11'. If my calculations are corect..(110" diagonal screen having a width of 94".

Thanks again for your help.

Jamie

I have received differing recs on which stewart screen gain to choose.
The choice is between studiotek 130 and ultramatte 150 or the new reflections screen( gain is 1.7)
The room is totally light controlled with dark walls. The new 2D and 3D projector will be the sony 95es with rated 1000 lumens---at least on day one! The screen size will be 114 inches diagonal--56 x 99 inches in 16:9 AR . The throw distance is 13.5 feet and I will watch 2D movies 80 percent and 3D 20 percent--with definite light fall-off in 3D----sooooo which gain to choose: 1.3 or 1.5---or 1.7 thanx

Me personally, i would do the 1.3 or 1.5 gain tops. I know that Sony used a 1.5 gain when working with their projectors.

Benito

Hi

I have a Optoma HD87 projector and would like a FireHawk 110 inch 2.35:1 screen.
My viewing distance would be about 8 feet from the screen.
I understand the FireHawk requires a lens to screen throw of 1.6 x image width but is this the 16:9 image or the 2.35:1 image size?
If it is the 2.35:1 image size then my throw would be below 1.6 x image width because the projector would be 12.32 feet from the screen which is the ideal distance for my 16:9 image then i would be using a anamorphic lens for the 2.35:1 image.

Thanks

it's for the 16:9 image.
One thing to note, i wouldn't say that it requires the throw of 1.6 x image width. Yes it's true, to get the best out of the Firehawk material, it's definitely recommended, but not absolutely necessary. Also, if you get worried about hotspotting, you can consider the Firehawk SST material.

We are an authorized Stewart dealer so if you or anyone else is in need of pricing, feel free to contact us.


Benito

Well looks like I will be a proud owner of a new Stewart screen. Just ordered the luxus model A electric screen with the new reflections 170 3D material at 110". It will be paired with a Sony HW30. Probably take a few weeks for it to be manufactured and delivered but can't wait to see it. Will post pics and impressions when it's installed.

Well looks like I will be a proud owner of a new Stewart screen. Just ordered the luxus model A electric screen with the new reflections 170 3D material at 110". It will be paired with a Sony HW30. Probably take a few weeks for it to be manufactured and delivered but can't wait to see it. Will post pics and impressions when it's installed.

Very nice!! Definitely post pics when you get everything up and running.

Benito

Very nice!! Definitely post pics when you get everything up and running.

Benito

Benito,

I was trying to send you a PM but doesn't let me.

Thanks,
Chris

I have to say as a Studiotek 130 owner....

I second guess myself as much as anyone. So I'm always wondering "is there anything I could have done, or could to for an even better image?"

Naturally when people rave about other types of screen materials is piques my interest.
Especially those that preserve contrast, like specialty screens (e.g. Black Diamond/DNP..or high gain High Power screens and the like).

Every time I am able to check out another screen material it re-affirms I've made the best decision on the ST-130. I simply can not put up with the obviousness of the screen artifacts of the specialty screens - all that obvious hot-spotting, off-axis dimming, speckly screen coating...yuck! (I can certainly see the appeal to many people of such products to be sure. They just don't do it for me).

The ST-130 yielded an amazing image for me from day one, in terms of brightness, image clarity and color balance. I have found that this is a screen that certainly rewards you the more room reflections you can control. It certainly looked great in my "controlled room reflections but nowhere near bat-cave" beginning. But my current image looks even more spectacular in terms of a life-like dynamic contrast, with room reflections even more controlled (almost bat-cave like).

Yes, I'd love it if a screen could look just as good without going to the effort of controlling room reflections. But...ye canna break the laws of physics, and I am willing to go with the more pure image and work on my room, vs a gray screen with gain.

The main screen that tugs my curiosity is the ST-100. I'd LOVE to see how that works in my room. It would be a bit dimmer, and it would also spread more light around so I don't know if ultimately I would like the trade offs. But..still curious.

Benito,

I was trying to send you a PM but doesn't let me.

Thanks,
Chris

Hey Chris,

Sorry, best bet is to email me.
Email is in signature.

I'll keep an eye out and get to it right away.

Benito

Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".
Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),
how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.
trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.
If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.
my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,
Thanks.

Man i forgot all about this company,,,,

Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".
Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),
how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.
trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.
If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.
my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,
Thanks.

Little bigger but this one will give you an idea. Drawing attached. A dealer can run the dimensions for you.

Thanks alot Scott,that helps tremendously.
So I have 8" roughly at both ends,I'll play around with 4-6"(just in case to see where she'll be).Screens,lenses,takes a awhile.Scott has Isco raised their prices yet,thanks.

They can also customize it for you to accommodate your application. if it's nothing major, there wouldn't be an upcharge either.

Benito

Not yet. shhhhh.

Good news about the 110" reflections 170 3d screen I ordered 3 weeks ago, should be delivered on Wednesday or Thursday and will be installed this Saturday. Will post some pics and thoughts when it's all up.

Very nice!! What projector are you using with it?

Benito

I'm using the Sony HW30 which I purchased from you;) it will be 11'5" from the screen so I'm hoping there won't be any hot spotting or sparklies but since this is new material and just out and not seeing it action makes me a bit nervous. Nice thing is I can put the Sony into low mode for 2D and hopefully that will help but will really just have to wait and see on Saturday.

I'm using the Sony HW30 which I purchased from you;) it will be 11'5" from the screen so I'm hoping there won't be any hot spotting or sparklies but since this is new material and just out and not seeing it action makes me a bit nervous. Nice thing is I can put the Sony into low mode for 2D and hopefully that will help but will really just have to wait and see on Saturday.

I'm very interested in your impressions as I am considering that screen with a VW95

I'm very interested in your impressions as I am considering that screen with a VW95

what size did you have in mind with the 95?

Benito

what size did you have in mind with the 95?

Benito

I'm thinking 110-115 but it is a new smaller space so I am going to test out some sizes on the wall for a bit to see what actually works.

The Stewart is definitely in my short list, and the DNP, and maybe Carada.

I have a Firehawk from about six years ago. It is not the G3, but just the "Firehawk" that was available at that time. What would the gain be on that screen, and would it be sufficient for 3D? It is a 92" diagonal.

Just wanted to report that I got my 110" Stewart Luxus model A installed on Saturday with their new Reflections 170 3D material. Will try and post some pics by next week but I will give a few thoughts on it now. I'm using the Sony HW30 with it placed 11'5" back and can say that hot spotting is practically non existent and I can detect no sparcklies in bright or scenes with snow. I feel it gives 2D movies a very nice pop with colours. Only thing I'm a little disappointed in is 3D movies aren't as bright as I thought they would be and when watching 2D movies if I really look at the screen I can see the texture a bit but only if I really concentrate on one spot if that makes any sense. I am surprised that the viewing angle is better than I thought it would be which is good. When putting the screen up/ down the motor is quiet. That's about it for now have only watched Star Wars episode 1 on blu ray and in 3D pirates and beauty and the beast so I want to see a few more movies in my collection before I really can say how much I like it but so far it's pretty good.

Just wanted to report that I got my 110" Stewart Luxus model A installed on Saturday with their new Reflections 170 3D material. Will try and post some pics by next week but I will give a few thoughts on it now. I'm using the Sony HW30 with it placed 11'5" back and can say that hot spotting is practically non existent and I can detect no sparcklies in bright or scenes with snow. I feel it gives 2D movies a very nice pop with colours. Only thing I'm a little disappointed in is 3D movies aren't as bright as I thought they would be and when watching 2D movies if I really look at the screen I can see the texture a bit but only if I really concentrate on one spot if that makes any sense. I am surprised that the viewing angle is better than I thought it would be which is good. When putting the screen up/ down the motor is quiet. That's about it for now have only watched Star Wars episode 1 on blu ray and in 3D pirates and beauty and the beast so I want to see a few more movies in my collection before I really can say how much I like it but so far it's pretty good.can you do separate calibrations for 2D and 3D?

I just set up my new Studiotek 130 which I purchased from AVS Science. Thanks Benito!

My old screen was a Carada BW. A good screen, but I was looking for increased brightness when needed. The difference in gain, even though both are rated about the same, was immediately apparent. The Stewart screen isn't cheap, but it is a step up and well worth the higher cost.

The one complaint I have is the mounting design. The Carada has a rail you attach to the wall. You simply place the screen frame above the rail and slide it down until it locks into place. The rail can also be leveled very easily while on the wall, which makes leveling the screen a breeze. The Stewart approach is Rube Goldberg reincarnated. I shook my head, gave up and slid the "quick snap" brackets underneath the Carada rail which I had left in place.

Stewart needs to make conventional wall mounting as simple and convenient as Carada.

I just set up my new Studiotek 130 which I purchased from AVS Science. Thanks Benito!

My old screen was a Carada BW. A good screen, but I was looking for increased brightness when needed. The difference in gain, even though both are rated about the same, was immediately apparent. The Stewart screen isn't cheap, but it is a step up and well worth the higher cost.

The one complaint I have is the mounting design. The Carada has a rail you attach to the wall. You simply place the screen frame above the rail and slide it down until it locks into place. The rail can also be leveled very easily while on the wall, which makes leveling the screen a breeze. The Stewart approach is Rube Goldberg reincarnated. I shook my head, gave up and slid the "quick snap" brackets underneath the Carada rail which I had left in place.

Stewart needs to make conventional wall mounting as simple and convenient as Carada.

not a problem!! Since you paid a good amount for the screen, it's good to see that there is a clear visual difference.

I can always bring that up. I'll agree with you, some of their ways are still a bit 'old school' and works but isn't the best.

Benito

Does anyone who owns a Stewart screen with horizontal masking panels have a comment about the following issue I am having with my screen?

I recently acquired from AVS (Benito) a 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen with the horizontal masking panels. When I move the lower masking panel up or down, I can hear a noise coming from the spring inside the right-hand side of the frame. It sounds as if the spring is being plucked as it expands or contracts. The spring inside the left-hand side of the frame makes no such noise. From 1999 until 2011, I owned a similar screen with an 84 inch diagonal and it made no such noise on either side. I am wondering if other people are hearing this noise with their screen's panels. Does anyone know if this noise is indicative of a problem? My panel moves up and down very smoothly, so the noise does not appear to be causing an immediate problem. I'm just concerned that if the spring is rubbing against something, it could cause the metal to wear over time and it could eventually break.

Does anyone who owns a Stewart screen with horizontal masking panels have a comment about the following issue I am having with my screen?

I recently acquired from AVS (Benito) a 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen with the horizontal masking panels. When I move the lower masking panel up or down, I can hear a noise coming from the spring inside the right-hand side of the frame. It sounds as if the spring is being plucked as it expands or contracts. The spring inside the left-hand side of the frame makes no such noise. From 1999 until 2011, I owned a similar screen with an 84 inch diagonal and it made no such noise on either side. I am wondering if other people are hearing this noise with their screen's panels. Does anyone know if this noise is indicative of a problem? My panel moves up and down very smoothly, so the noise does not appear to be causing an immediate problem. I'm just concerned that if the spring is rubbing against something, it could cause the metal to wear over time and it could eventually break.
I have not heard this kind of sound. I think you're right to be concerned, I'm thinking something is slightly out of place. Maybe call Stewart about it?

Hey Starflash,
sorry for the delay in responding. I know the sound you are referring to. I've seen and heard it before with other units with the same design as yours.

I can look into a solution for you. It's usually just replacing the spring and maybe the cord / pulley system. you'll get your hands a little dirty but should be an easy fix.

Benito

This is sort of repeating a sentiment I expressed in a post on the previous page but...

I had a chance to see JVC HD250 (I believe) on a smaller Black Diamond .8 gain screen. As usual while I was initially impressed by the way the screen held very nice contrast, even on a small screen I could see the image struggling a bit brightness-wise.
Not to mention the obvious screen texture and hotspotting. (Still, an excellent product for what it's designed to do).

At home the ST-130 material makes it so much easier to have a bright, brilliant image that holds terrific contrast (excellent black levels in a light controlled room) at much larger image sizes. I can go about 10 ft wide on my ST-130 and it still looks bright, while I could already see brightness limitations on the BD/JVC combo with a 93" diag screen. The ST-130 is still seems to be the best..that is the best performing, least compromised...screen I could have chosen for my room!

I can't wait to fire up my new JVC RS55 ("4k-lite") projector on this screen!

Hey, so how are you guys managing to do business with Stewart Filmscreen these days?? I've been trying since the start of November to get some samples from them via AVScience. Mike Garrett (of AVScience) must have tried at least four times now with different contacts at Stewart -- all with no result. He's finally just thrown in the towel and apologized for Stewart's apparent lack of interest in dealing with potential customers.

I've recently moved and I'm upgrading my JVC RS1 to an RS55 (coming Wednesday, woot!) and I'm looking to put in a retractable 12' x 5' screen in my new home theater space. I'd just go with Da-Lite whom I've used before for fixed screens for both myself and my brother but I'm interested in seeing Stewart's current 1.3 and 1.5 materials before deciding.

So how'd you manage to get samples from Stewart or did you just order blind? Anybody with recent Stewart samples to spare? (I'm in Santa Cruz, CA.)

Hey, so how are you guys managing to do business with Stewart Filmscreen these days?? I've been trying since the start of November to get some samples from them via AVScience. Mike Garrett (of AVScience) must have tried at least four times now with different contacts at Stewart -- all with no result. He's finally just thrown in the towel and apologized for Stewart's apparent lack of interest in dealing with potential customers.

I've recently moved and I'm upgrading my JVC RS1 to an RS55 (coming Wednesday, woot!) and I'm looking to put in a retractable 12' x 5' screen in my new home theater space. I'd just go with Da-Lite whom I've used before for fixed screens for both myself and my brother but I'm interested in seeing Stewart's current 1.3 and 1.5 materials before deciding.

So how'd you manage to get samples from Stewart or did you just order blind? Anybody with recent Stewart samples to spare? (I'm in Santa Cruz, CA.)

I can't speak to the slow samples, but I have 2 ST130 screens and there is nothing like that material. If you room is light controlled, it is the best I have seen. Be patient and you will be glad you took your time!

Hey Dr. Horrible, I have a few extra samples from my own personal stash I can probably send to you. Feel free to send me your info.

Thanks!

Looking for a quick sanity check on the projector / screen combination I'm using. My previous projector was an Optima HD70? from 6 or so years ago. Several months ago I switched to the Epson 9500UB. I am still using the 110" Stewart Firehawk screen I had used with my Optima. I'm not sure of the exact version of Firehawk, but it's about 6 years old if that helps, maybe even 7. Greyish/silver. I recall at the time the recommendation was to go with that screen with the DLP Optima projector. Now that my projector is no longer DLP, is that still a decent combination?

The room is a dedicated media room, minimal ambient light when watching movies. During the daytime the 2 rear windows in the room bring in a very small amount of light but I have blinds/curtains so it's very little.

Just curious on what the ideal screen is for the 9500UB. I'm tossing around the idea of maybe moving up to 120".

Thanks,
Rich

Can anyone suggest a good Stewart screen to use with the Runco Q-750i with a Whitney anamorphic lens?

Anyone tried their curved screens? Do you think its worth the extra expense?

What can I expect to see using a Runco instead of a Da-lite or other less expensive brand?

Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".
Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),
how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.
trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.
If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.
my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,
Thanks.

Did you buy this screen and try it out yet? Im looking for feedback on it. Did you user your projector with a flat screen first to be able to compare if it made a noticeable difference on the edges?

A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.

Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).

A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.

Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).

My theater will be dedicated with full light control, and I believe I said Im going to use the Runco LED projector. I was looking at the Stewart studiotek 130, I was thinking that since I had a projector that does an excellent job of black levels and colors that I wanted a pure screen. Im not sure if I need a grey screen to help with contrast. I considered the 1.0 gain screen but figured the little bit of extra gain would be nice for times when there may be some lights on.

I know people talk about the LEDs not having enough light but frankly from what I've seen in the few demos this is a statement not based on having seen it. It bright scenes it was too bright and I would have preferred the output turned down. I think it has plenty of light for viewing. And the detail in black scenes was outstanding.

A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.

Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).

GetGray - Is the Firehawk screen grey or white? I was assuming it was grey but then I thought about it and I'm not actually sure. I looked on stewarts site and saw there is two fire hawk screens but I can't see if its white or grey. Theres the Firehawk G3 and SST

The firehawk is gray. The SST is for shorter throw installations.

The firehawk is gray. The SST is for shorter throw installations.

how do you define short throw? My room is 17 feet long, so the throw will be between 14-15 feet. 1.87 is the min ratio and it will be close to that, maybe around 2

SST throw ratios 1.4-1.6
G3 throw ratios 1.6 or >

I have been looking at many screens and have settled on purchasing a Stewart Screen. I am using a DP M-Vison Cine 260 HC (high contrast) projector. The specs say it is 2000 lumens. I do have a few windows that will be covered with very heavy black out draperies but I only watch movies at night anyway so there would be complete darkness. I do need an accoustically transparent screen as I will have my center channel speaker behind the screen. The screen will be 16:9 (1:78) and approximately 135 "wide. Would appreciate any opinions on this. thank you. Mark






http://www.digitalprojection.com/BrowseProjectors/SeriesList/ProjectorList/ProjectorDetail/tabid/87/ProjectorId/166/MarketTypeId/11/Default.aspx

I have been looking at many screens and have settled on purchasing a Stewart Screen. I am using a DP M-Vison Cine 260 HC (high contrast) projector. The specs say it is 2000 lumens. I do have a few windows that will be covered with very heavy black out draperies but I only watch movies at night anyway so there would be complete darkness. I do need an accoustically transparent screen as I will have my center channel speaker behind the screen. The screen will be 16:9 (1:78) and approximately 135 "wide. Would appreciate any opinions on this. thank you. Mark






http://www.digitalprojection.com/BrowseProjectors/SeriesList/ProjectorList/ProjectorDetail/tabid/87/ProjectorId/166/MarketTypeId/11/Default.aspx

That M Vision is one of my favorite projectors. I've seen it paired up with Stewart screens with amazing results. At 135" wide, that's a pretty big 16:9 screen. I would suggest you look into the Ultramatte 130 or possibly jumping up into the Ultramatte 150. Both available in microperf.

Benito

Can anyone suggest a good Stewart screen to use with the Runco Q-750i with a Whitney anamorphic lens?

Anyone tried their curved screens? Do you think its worth the extra expense?

What can I expect to see using a Runco instead of a Da-lite or other less expensive brand?

The real question is what size do you want? with a 1.0 gain at 98" diag you will get around 16 FL at 120" diag 1.0 gain you will get around 10.5 FL

What do you consider a good level of light? Also is you get a Stewart you can go up in gain without hotspoting. a 1.3 Studiotek G3 is a great pairing and I have see the Q-750i with a 135" diag scope ST130 G3. with more than enough light to have a great experience.

Question about Stewart tensioned screens and remote control:
I was doing some research on the Stewart tensioned screens and noticed that the amount of extension of the screen comes pre-set from the factory to drop a certain distance (depending on the customer's specs). According to the owner's manual, there is some range of adjustment so you can limit or extend the drop by +/- a few inches. Does anyone know if this negatively affects the tab-tensioning system if this is done? Also there is a bewildering array of options to control the screen remotely (up and down, masking, etc). Does Stewart have a remote option (IR or RF) that permits use of a universal remote such as the Logitech Harmony One?

I just ordered my screen with the 12V trigger option. This will allow your projector, AV receiver, or in my case the video processor, to lower and raise the screen. My AV receiver and video processor both support the 12V trigger feature. Most projectors do also but my JVC RS1 projector doesn't support this feature.

All I have the chance to get a used 120 16x9 Stewart Firehawk screen. Not sure how old it is. What should I look out for when inspecting the screen? Does Stewart's gain covering wear off? How easily is it damagd? What would be a reasonable price?

All I have the chance to get a used 120 16x9 Stewart Firehawk screen. Not sure how old it is. What should I look out for when inspecting the screen? Does Stewart's gain covering wear off? How easily is it damagd? What would be a reasonable price?

Also it had a model number of It's SNDQ120HFWezX.

Is there anyway to tell if this is an SST or G3?

Need a recommendation on Screen. Like many other people here I am trying to decide between the Firehawk G3 and the Studiotek 130. My room is completely light controlled the walls are dark gray and the ceiling is even darker. My problem is that i do have 4 light Sconces. Two on the back wall where the projector will be mounted and two on the side wall because of this i am thrown on witch material to get. I have not purchased my PJ yet buy think i have decided on the EPSON 6010. I am including a model of the room to give you guys a better idea of what the room looks like (The window in the model is going to be 100% covered). Oh yeah the PJ will be mounted 15' 9" away and i am considering going with a 110" screen. Thanks Guys


https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-V6wc4mpzPCQ/Twd2grCxmZI/AAAAAAAAF5U/21j0d04zwtA/s640/Theatre_004.png

but you'll have those lights (and all light/lights) off during the movie, right? if so, I would go with the studiotek - I wish I would have. I have the firehawk, and it's fine, but I think my image would be a little brighter with my current projector (jvc rs2).

having said that, I don't know much about the epson, but as long as it has a good contrast ratio, I would think you'd want the studiotek. (but if you decide you want a firehawk, like if you'll have light in the room, let me know if you want to buy one that's 107" wide (123" diagonal)! :) )

More then likely I will have the lights on but will have them at a very dim setting, just enough to illuminate the globe. I would love to go larger than 110 diagonal but unfortunately I am maxed out on height in this room.

More then likely I will have the lights on but will have them at a very dim setting, just enough to illuminate the globe. I would love to go larger than 110 diagonal but unfortunately I am maxed out on height in this room.
okay, with any light on you'd probably want the firehawk.

but, can I ask why you want to have them on at all, especially since it sounds like you won't have them on enough to light the floor (but it will be enough to light the screen)? just curious, you may change your mind once you get to that point, and it's your ht to enjoy as you see fit!

I think i am just going for the overall ambiance, I mean when you go to any regular theater they always dim the lighting but leave the lights on just slightly. Id have to go back and look again but when I set the lights to movie mode (ie dim the lights to the point where just the globe is illuminated) I don't believe the lights are hitting the ground and i dont think they are bright enough at that point to be picked up by the screen.

Updated with a little better picture of the sconces
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-nXBJPh615g0/Twu-7V9lQpI/AAAAAAAAF6Q/VdAPxOQ05m8/s640/sconcesLighting.jpg

I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

I cannot say for sure but it's possible by putting it onto the frame the folds will disappear over a little time.

The hair dryer might help but I won't recommend it since I don't have any experience with whether that might cause problems.

I would be annoyed with the seller, unless that folding was disclosed up front and factored into the sale and you had a reasonable plan (fixing it or replacing it). But that's just my opinion.

I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

I recentley purchased a used Stewart screen and had excellent luck contacting Stewart with a few questions I had. Give them a ring I am sure they have seen/responded to your situation in the past.

Good luck.

I played around a bit with my screen samples - small ones unfortunately. I have a totally light controlled room and currently use the ST130 in my set up. First thing about the ST-100 snow matte material is that even it has some tiny sparklies when viewed from several inches away. Though not that my eye picked up from further away.

Pixel resolution was very clearly better on the ST-100 vs the other screen samples that had gain, e.g. the firehawk etc. Though the difference between the ST-100 and the ST-130 was pretty marginal in that respect.

I was actually expecting the ST-100 material to look a bit more washed out than the ST-130 material, but to my surprise it consistently looked a tiny bit better in contrast. Only looking at the sample (which can be quite misleading) it was the best material I've seen. One day I might try this material....

I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks


FWIW...

Before I got my Stewart ST-130 material I was using a 105" diagonal sheet of neutral gain screen material, taped on to my wall (obviously not permanent). It fell down countless times and looked incredibly rough each time I picked it up from the floor- completely folded and wrinkled. Yet again and again those wrinkles essentially disappeared when I simply taped it up again. If I had actually stretched that material on to a frame I'm sure it would have been totally flat.

I suspect your screen material may be more robust than you think, and once put in a frame I'm betting it will look fine, especially with a projected image.

Can anyone tell me if the Stewart ST-100 material would be ok for 3D?

Thanks

Can anyone tell me if the Stewart ST-100 material would be ok for 3D?

Thanks

If your projector is bright enough and your screen is small enough that you can adequately light it up in 3D then you will be fine, but those are big if's. It all comes down to lumen output and screen area. Take the lumen output of the projector in 3D mode and divide by the area of the screen. Multiply by gain (in your case 1.0) then divide by 4 and that will give you aprox. Foot Lamberts for 3D.

Thanks for the reply. I was mainly concerned about the "polarization" issue, where some screens (brightness aside) seem to be less suitable than others.

Polarization is a big issue if you are using a passive 3D system, with active 3D it is not a problem. If using a passive 3D system the best choice for 2D/3D would be the 5D material. With active 3D any of the other screens will work fine and pick the one that is best for your situation.

The ST-100 is a top notch screen and will have the best detail of any of them but you lose contrast very fast due to light reflecting off the wall, ceiling, and other surfaces back to the screen. If your room is not close to the ideal black bat cave so to speak it wouldn't be the best choice but if it is close to that ideal environment this screen rocks as long as you have a bright enough projector. A screen with some gain like the ST-130 or FH to reduce those reflections from hurting contrast would be a better choice for most installations.

Anytime you have a screen with gain the coating to make that gain will somewhat skew/blur the pixels as light is being bent to direct the light in a given direction. Nobody has beat physics with this. A screen that distributes light evenly in all directions will cause the pixels to be clearer and more defined. You have a good eye if you noticed these difference with the ST-100 compared to the other screens.

I have a reflections 170 screen with microperf. It is 120" and is in total light controlled room with 14.5 feet viewing distance. I can still see grain and I think it is the microperf. I am using the JVC RS55 and the throw is at 14.5 feet as well. I have black carpet and black ceiling. I was informed if the room was light controlled that you would not be able to see the microperf past 12 feet. Would like to hear some feedback. No lights on in the room and no windows and doors shut.

Polarization is a big issue if you are using a passive 3D system, with active 3D it is not a problem. If using a passive 3D system the best choice for 2D/3D would be the 5D material. With active 3D any of the other screens will work fine and pick the one that is best for your situation.

The ST-100 is a top notch screen and will have the best detail of any of them but you lose contrast very fast due to light reflecting off the wall, ceiling, and other surfaces back to the screen. If your room is not close to the ideal black bat cave so to speak it wouldn't be the best choice but if it is close to that ideal environment this screen rocks as long as you have a bright enough projector. A screen with some gain like the ST-130 or FH to reduce those reflections from hurting contrast would be a better choice for most installations.

Anytime you have a screen with gain the coating to make that gain will somewhat skew/blur the pixels as light is being bent to direct the light in a given direction. Nobody has beat physics with this. A screen that distributes light evenly in all directions will cause the pixels to be clearer and more defined. You have a good eye if you noticed these difference with the ST-100 compared to the other screens.

So, have you seen the ST-100 in good conditions? And does it deliver? For instance, vs the ST-130, is there any detectable increase in clarity, or contrast (as some claim), or realism? Is the screen really "invisible" once projected upon?

Thanks,

I have seen the ST-100 in a lab near us, at Stewart's facility and in my house. The lab is all black with black velveteen on many surfaces. It does deliver increased clarity which is noticeable compared to other screens, The JKP screens are a close second. I doubt contrast changes much though. ANSI contrast would change depending on the room conditions. I'm not sure I would call it "invisible" but it is like a reference speaker it tells it like it is.

When in that perfect room the room does seem to disappear as there are no reflections for your eyes to focus on.

Thanks BobL.

For me the room is supreme, so I keep trying to edge toward the "black box" capability when I'm viewing movies. In my view, a super dark environment is not only better for maintaining projected image quality, it also makes for a more intense, immersive, cinematic experience.

We are replacing an Electriscreen we put in about 12 years ago (reconfiguring room and going with a stationary 2.35:1 rather than a retractable 16:9) and need some help pricing the used screen. We can't seem to figure out even which model on Stewart's website is their current equivalent...

Screen material: Ultramatte 150
Model number: SR-AH 92 (45" x 80")
Serial number: 99 SRA 98XXXXX

It's the tab-tensioned motorized drop-down screen. We have the 12V screen trigger interface.

It's been gently-used in a dedicated theater room programmed to roll it up with room off (so it's clean from fingerprints and wear and tear that come from a screen hanging around, etc.).

Any suggestions for how to price it? Any idea what the current equivalent model is?

Anyone heard of Silver Screen Home Theater? This shop is selling cheap screens in Videogon. Wondering if it's reliable.

looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....

looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....

I wouldn't want to use a 130 with a white ceiling even in a totally dark room. But the bottom line is that the I don't think the 130 will be a big change in that kind of environment for you from what you are currently using, especially with ambient light.

Don't get me wrong, it's one of the best screens on the market, but not for all use cases.

what would you recommend? The image on the Carada is nice and bright, but my issue is that the screen has vertical striations running down the entire screen making the picture less than prime looking. I chalk that up to being a "low cost" issue.

Sounds like a warranty issue on the Carada. I don't want to tell you not to get a Stewart Screen. I love mine. But I'm not sure it's the solution. Have you tried the Carada thread, or even talking with the manufacturer directly?

yeah.... there are a few that notice the striations. Carada is sending me a replacement screen when they get a new lot in. They seem to think its a manufacturing issue where the screen comes out on rollers. It almost looks like stretchmarks! Kind of odd looking. I appreciate your honest opinion....

looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....

FireHawk G3 would be a good choice for you. Give us a call if we can help you.

I received an interesting suggestion the other day. I would like a scope screen, but we also watch a lot of broadcast TV. I currently have a Microperf 10' x 6' Studiotek 130. The suggestion was to go to a 12' x 6' screen, since that would accommodate a 12 x 5 ft scope size, that can revert to the 10 x 6 that we like. I was thinking of the new Stewart Reflections 170, since we want the gain for an eventual 3D setup. We are currently sitting 15 ft. away, but if I'm making these changes, I would move the screen to about 10 ft. away. We have very good light control, and I'm getting rid of the white ceiling and green wall behind the screen, in favor of a medium gray ceiling and a deep blue background, to help the contrast. Any thoughts. Oh, my current projector is a DPI highlite 260 HC.

David

This post is to Mark Haflich , hoping he shows up to answer:

Mark,

Thanks so much for commenting on the performance of your new Studiotek 100 material. It's very intriguing for me as I have the ST-130 material (love it) but as good as it is, my ideal is to get that "screen disappearing" effect you describe with your ST-100 snomatt.

(I now have an 8" x 11" sample of the ST-100 material. Comparing it to my ST-130, the ST-100 has obviously less blurr from optical coating when looking at pixels close up. From a distance, at least with this sample, the brightness difference seemed negligeable (there, but not terribly big difference). It's also been pointed out in some reviews of the ST-100 that due to the subtle hotspotting nature of the ST-130, darker as you move away from the centre of the screen, the overall measured difference of the entire screen surfaces of an ST-100 and ST-130 are not as far off as the gain rating suggests (as the ST-100 remains bright corner-to-corner).

So I hoped the impact of the brightness drop would be somewhat mitigated by this fact. Though, you do note definitely seeing a brightness drop.
(I have to consider these things since I sometimes view images at 130" diagonal 16:9 or 118" wide scope).

I am just about at "bat cave" performance for my room, in terms of employing dark fabrics to cut all room reflections, which is another reason why I'm considering the ST-100 material. Another thing is I absolutely LOVE even image brightness, and viewing angles that are unrestricted, for which the ST-100 no doubt excels.

Still, I admit I'm kind of surprised you found the ST-100 made such a noticeable difference over the ST-130, but it's nice to know that a performance gain in my system is a future possibility (switching to the ST-100). Any additional comments or insight you have on your new screen material would be welcome.

BTW, when you said your wife thought it was "like viewing the disc for the first time" was that a comment comparing your new ST-100 material vs your ST-130, or a comment on the Sony 1000 projector's performance?

Thanks.



Cool. 15/9?

Anyhow, today I replaced my Studeotec 130 GII with a piece of Snomatt. My screen is only 54 x 96. The brightness drop was noticeable but the Sony was still plenty bright tjhough I did open the iris up a bit more.

The picture however was noticeably and markedly better. The clear window I have talked about here became clearer. Perhaps what I am trying to say is the screen material was now absent from perception. I watched one of those under the seas 3D Imax films and it was like being in an aquarium. Crystal clear and great depth with considerable visability of the space behind the primary objects being filmed.

I called my wife down and she said this was like viewing the disc for the first time.

She then asked to watch the video of the musical Memphis on a PBS station. She felt it was like being slightly off stage or being the conductor in the orchestra pit. I said do you want to me to switch to one of our other projectors for comparision. She said why? She said this was amazing and made watching HD into a new experience and was obviously magnitudes better than our other projectors. I put the best one on anyway, and it is no slouch, and she said was I trying to kid her. It was now unwatchable.

When watching a projected image in a good HT, one is aware that it is a projected image and not the actual you are there scene. The new screen material now removed the awareness of the screen from that perception in my HT. The projector, perhaps because of the increased pixel density and increased lumens over the other projectors I, on the Studeotec 130 GII screen presented a much more liquid rather than digital
picture if that makes any sensethan I have seen before. The picture just looked real but with the 130GII I was still aware of the screen.. Obviously what we saw last night was due to the projector and screen and being in a black pit. My wife stayed in the theater for almost 4 hours, a new record. This one gets shipped out on Tuesday.

Hi Rich. She had seen the Sony before on my 130 but not on the Snomat. My 130 was GII also not GII. The picture was a tad dimmer to my eyes but not a huge drop and I could easily negate it with menu settings (opening the iris up).

The biggest difference was the absolute light uniformity accross the screen and a complete absence of texture. The screen material just was gone.

David Shapiro. What is your throw using full scope width. You need a long throw to avoide hot spotting with high gain screens and 1.7 is a compromise for 2D in order to boost 3D brightness.

I agree to my eyes, with samples only, the ST100 only appears to be slightly dimmer to the 130. With my samples I could discern what Mark describes. The 100's lack of shimmer from the .3 less gain translates into a very sharp solid looking image with the perception of more detail. I wish the 1000 could handle a 141" wide scope ratio ST100, and it still may, but not sure I am willing to take that chance.

I agree to my eyes, with samples only, the ST100 only appears to be slightly dimmer to the 130. With my samples I could discern what Mark describes. The 100's lack of shimmer from the .3 less gain translates into a very sharp solid looking image with the perception of more detail. I wish the 1000 could handle a 141" wide scope ratio ST100, and it still may, but not sure I am willing to take that chance.

Yeah,

I had a 104" diag 16:9 screen of the Carada BW material. Jeff Miere - "umr" - had measured his BW sample at 1.03 gain and his ST-100 sample at 1.02 gain, so in terms of gain a negligible difference. I loved the Carada but at least with my previous projector when I was using it (Panny AE900) I appreciated a bit more gain on the ST-130. I wonder what type of quality difference there would be between the ST-100 and the Carada BW.

If the ST-100 would be visibly better than my ST-130 I might go for it and deal with the slight light drop.

David Shapiro. What is your throw using full scope width. You need a long throw to avoide hot spotting with high gain screens and 1.7 is a compromise for 2D in order to boost 3D brightness.

Right now, 1.8. The first row of seats is 15 feet from the screen. I also want to move the screen closer to the seats, but I do have some real estate on the ceiling to play around with.

David

Hi Rich. She had seen the Sony before on my 130 but not on the Snomat. My 130 was GII also not GII. The picture was a tad dimmer to my eyes but not a huge drop and I could easily negate it with menu settings (opening the iris up).

The biggest difference was the absolute light uniformity accross the screen and a complete absence of texture. The screen material just was gone.


Thanks Mark.

One more thing: I know your room is a "bat cave" but I'm not sure whether you used paint to make it dark or dark fabric. What I'm wondering is, did you notice any visual increase in the amount of light thrown off your ST-100 to the surrounding ceiling/walls, vs your ST-130?

Apparently one is supposed to expect this, given the ST-100's wider reflective pattern, hence you may see ceilings/walls lighting up more than with the ST-130. Was that the case?

Also, did you note any difference (good or bad) in terms of apparent image contrast or detail with the ST-100 over the ST-130? Supposedly the lack of light scatter is purported to allow a tighter image and better contrast, though I don't know how perceptible this would be (and would obviously depend on room conditions).

(I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible - hence surrounding it with black velvet). Since you are really the only person with an ST-100, especially having just replaced your ST-130, you are about my only source of insight on this screen. (And your posts are getting me serious about purchasing the ST-100).

Thanks,

R Harkness, did your above question get anwered via pm? I also wondered about the ST100 light scatter on walls/ceiling vs the ST130.

R Harkness, did your above question get anwered via pm? I also wondered about the ST100 light scatter on walls/ceiling vs the ST130.

Mark didn't reply directly to me about that, but he did mention it to someone else in the Sony 1000 thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=21707107#post21707107

Quote:

"The Snomatt is not to be used in a less than black pit room. It has a gain of one and sprays light all over the place. My black everything sucks it up killing all reflections. yYou can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt vs the Studeotec 130. "

That "light spray" is what concerns me, because I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible with velvet. I can achieve this with my ST-130 screen (using Fidelio black velvet, everything around the screen disappears).

I'm confused by what Mark wrote because on one hand he says his black velvet "sucks it up killing all reflections" but on the other says "You can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt"...which seems to indicate the opposite.

I don't know Mark's theater space, but it's not unusual to use velvet on the front wall around the screen and some other black fabric like Guildford of Maine, on the side walls.

They could have different light absorbing properties.

Mark didn't reply directly to me about that, but he did mention it to someone else in the Sony 1000 thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=21707107#post21707107

Quote:

"The Snomatt is not to be used in a less than black pit room. It has a gain of one and sprays light all over the place. My black everything sucks it up killing all reflections. yYou can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt vs the Studeotec 130. "

That "light spray" is what concerns me, because I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible with velvet. I can achieve this with my ST-130 screen (using Fidelio black velvet, everything around the screen disappears).

I'm confused by what Mark wrote because on one hand he says his black velvet "sucks it up killing all reflections" but on the other says "You can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt"...which seems to indicate the opposite.

Not Mark, but I believe what he means is the viewing angle is greater with the Snomatt, therefore the light scatter is greater on the surrounding walls. If you do not have a lot of dark non reflective materials on the walls, that light will get bounced right back on to the screen, washing out the image. Mark can see that more light hits the black velvet, but a lot of it does not make it back to the screen since it is hitting black velvet rather than a reflective wall surface.

Like everything else in HT wide viewing angle has its compromise and that is light scatter and usually lower gain.

Hi,

I am in the process of purchasing this screen. It is being sold as a Firehawk G3 but I suspect it is an earlier version. I have attached some pictures so if anyone can help identify it I would appreciate it.

If it is an earlier Firehawk or Firehawk G2 how would it compare to the G3?

Thanks

Not Mark, but I believe what he means is the viewing angle is greater with the Snomatt, therefore the light scatter is greater on the surrounding walls. If you do not have a lot of dark non reflective materials on the walls, that light will get bounced right back on to the screen, washing out the image. Mark can see that more light hits the black velvet, but a lot of it does not make it back to the screen since it is hitting black velvet rather than a reflective wall surface.

Like everything else in HT wide viewing angle has its compromise and that is light scatter and usually lower gain.

Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.

That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).

I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.

The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.:(

Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.

That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).

I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.

The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.:(

I suspect it is the cream white chairs that he has. :)

Guys,

I am going to purchase a masquerade cih (http://carada.com/MasqueradeCIH.aspx) and a ST130 stewart screen.
I have talked to Rex from Carada and he said to me that the best frame/installation would be something that leave the screen 2 inches max from the wall, and use the wrap-around method.

I could take a Luxus Deluxe, but the frame would be hidden inside the Mascarade and increase the gap and the chance for some shadows.

The Luxus frame is 1 1/2 inches, I dont know how much it would increase with a wrap-around method.

If I could purchase only the fabric, I could make an aluminum frame that would meet the requirements from Carada.

Any thoughs?

[]s Humberto

Guys,

I am going to purchase a masquerade cih (http://carada.com/MasqueradeCIH.aspx) and a ST130 stewart screen.
I have talked to Rex from Carada and he said to me that the best frame/installation would be something that leave the screen 2 inches max from the wall, and use the wrap-around method.

I could take a Luxus Deluxe, but the frame would be hidden inside the Mascarade and increase the gap and the chance for some shadows.

The Luxus frame is 1 1/2 inches, I dont know how much it would increase with a wrap-around method.

If I could purchase only the fabric, I could make an aluminum frame that would meet the requirements from Carada.

Any thoughs?

[]s Humberto

Nice masking system. I think Stewart will sell only fabric if you ask. I first had a Firehawk installed on my Luxus Deluxe frame but then decided on the ST130 because I had good light control. I was able to get just the ST130 material with snaps to match the existing frame. The Firehawk is now rolled up in its original tube in case I want to sell. My screen is 137" 2.4:1. So I'm sure they could do same without the snaps. However, the screen is stretchy and requires precise contact points to avoid any sagging or rippling. Its very taught when mounted to frame. I wonder if they could provide the frame snaps with a map of their mounting positions. Just a thought. It would certainly be difficult without the snaps.

I see that they have a lace and grommet installation system. It is easier to do a diy frame install with those.

If they worked like the Seymour Center Stage, i have all the planning ready!!!

Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.

That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).

I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.

The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.:(

My mains are very close to my screen and half of my mains stick past the front edge of my screen. In very bright scenes you could see the side of my speakers slightly, so I also covered my mains with black velvet. My sound panels have flat black cloth also. With this and my masking system, you see nothing but the image when watching a movie. So I understand excatly what you are talking about. My screen is Enlightor 4K. It is a low gain screen that does spread the light, but I am still able to maintain the look of nothing but image. I think with your setup, you will be able to do the same thing with the Stewart 100.

I see that they have a lace and grommet installation system. It is easier to do a diy frame install with those.

If they worked like the Seymour Center Stage, i have all the planning ready!!!The screens for the CineW are lace and grommet. So if you ordered a screen to fit a CineW you'd have a grommeted screen. I have ordered one like that for a customer of mine who had a particular masking system they wanted to keep but wanted to retrofit a Stewart material. However, I'd be extreemely careful about how much tension is applied. It does not work like the Seymour screen. There isn't much tension with their "lace" system. Too little, it will sag, too much it will stretch it and ruin it. Some dealers may be able to help you with the details and recommendations for your DIY frame.

My mains are very close to my screen and half of my mains stick past the front edge of my screen. In very bright scenes you could see the side of my speakers slightly, so I also covered my mains with black velvet. My sound panels have flat black cloth also. With this and my masking system, you see nothing but the image when watching a movie. So I understand excatly what you are talking about. My screen is Enlightor 4K. It is a low gain screen that does spread the light, but I am still able to maintain the look of nothing but image. I think with your setup, you will be able to do the same thing with the Stewart 100.

Thank you. That's very helpful.

Not allowed to discuss street pricing on forum. I'd guess about 50% of complete CineW screen, if that's what you are asking

Thanks a lot GetGray.. It seems to me that the best way is to use a standard luxus frame with wraparound, and if turns out to be more than 2 inches alo will try to increase the depth of the masquerade.

You are welcome. FYI, I gut got a dealer announcement from Stewart today for a substantial sale they are having on their quick ship models. Sale ends March 31st. See your preferred Stewart dealer or Jason/Mike at AVS, might get a little better than normal price if you have a common size. I skimmed back quickly in the thread and didn't see you size mentioned.

Cheers,
Scott

Hi,

I am in the process of purchasing this screen. It is being sold as a Firehawk G3 but I suspect it is an earlier version. I have attached some pictures so if anyone can help identify it I would appreciate it.

If it is an earlier Firehawk or Firehawk G2 how would it compare to the G3?

Thanks

With the model and serial number shown in picture 1, you should simply call Stewart and ask. That's the only way to be absolutely certain.

Thanks again!!! Will try that!!!
[]s Humberto

Anyone knows what's the smallest sized 2.35:1 Stewart electric screen? Is it 91" diagonal ? HD 130 material.

Deleted

Is a hair dryer the best method for getting wrinkles out of a firehawk fixed screen that's been in storage for a while? Thanks all

My electric one had big crease problem but after dropping the screen down for couple of nights and using a hair dryer to mildly heating it, all was fine again.

I first had a Firehawk installed on my Luxus Deluxe frame but then decided on the ST130 because I had good light control. I was able to get just the ST130 material with snaps to match the existing frame. My screen is 137" 2.4:1.

Hi Carey,

I`ve done exactly the same as you and have ordered the ST130 material to swap-over from my Firehawk G3 screen. My room is now a batcave with full light control so I thought the Firehawk G3 might not be the best material to suit those conditions so I opted for the ST130.

I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.

My screen is 117" 2.40:1 with a JVC HD950 projector.

Can I also just ask you do you recall approx how long your order took for the change of material ?
I ordered my material 2 months ago and haven`t had any updates.

Cheers mate,
Dave

Hi Carey,

I`ve done exactly the same as you and have ordered the ST130 material to swap-over from my Firehawk G3 screen. My room is now a batcave with full light control so I thought the Firehawk G3 might not be the best material to suit those conditions so I opted for the ST130.

I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.

My screen is 117" 2.40:1 with a JVC HD950 projector.

Can I also just ask you do you recall approx how long your order took for the change of material ?
I ordered my material 2 months ago and haven`t had any updates.

Cheers mate,
Dave

Well, I'm pretty sure it didn't take that long. It was several years ago so I really don't remember, sorry.
I was using a Panasonic AE2000U at the time and now a 7000. It's mounted at 18ft from the screen at the top edge, so i didn't have any real hot-spotting issue. But, I didn't care for the somewhat sparkly appearance of the Firehawk and wanted a screen that would essentially disappear and had flat wide angle response with a little more gain. I found I didn't need the contrast advantage since the LCD projectors had improved enough in that area. What I did like about the Firehawk's narrower cone angle was that the ceiling, walls and floor did not light up as much as the ST130. Also, for 16:9 material the black bars on the sides were so dark, there would never be need for black masking. It simply looked like I had a 16:9 screen.

With the ST130, I don't notice any screen structure at all, just the movie. No drop off to the sides of the 2.4:1 format. The room lights up a bit more, but now I don't need any lights on low in order to eat while watching;). Note, I do have a blacked out front wall and dark blue ceiling and dark walls. The black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress. Anyway, the ST130 wide angle response allows moving the projector closer if you need more brightness, especially for 3D. I just can't do that with my setup, but I'm very happy with it as is. Good luck.

Jacked,

If you don't mind me asking, how much was your replacement 123" material? I was thinking about doing the same thing with my 123. Thanks

Jacked,

If you don't mind me asking, how much was your replacement 123" material? I was thinking about doing the same thing with my 123. Thanks

Hi Jimbo,

You have a pm.

Dave

Well, I'm pretty sure it didn't take that long. It was several years ago so I really don't remember, sorry.
I was using a Panasonic AE2000U at the time and now a 7000. It's mounted at 18ft from the screen at the top edge, so i didn't have any real hot-spotting issue. But, I didn't care for the somewhat sparkly appearance of the Firehawk and wanted a screen that would essentially disappear and had flat wide angle response with a little more gain. I found I didn't need the contrast advantage since the LCD projectors had improved enough in that area. What I did like about the Firehawk's narrower cone angle was that the ceiling, walls and floor did not light up as much as the ST130. Also, for 16:9 material the black bars on the sides were so dark, there would never be need for black masking. It simply looked like I had a 16:9 screen.

With the ST130, I don't notice any screen structure at all, just the movie. No drop off to the sides of the 2.4:1 format. The room lights up a bit more, but now I don't need any lights on low in order to eat while watching;). Note, I do have a blacked out front wall and dark blue ceiling and dark walls. The black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress. Anyway, the ST130 wide angle response allows moving the projector closer if you need more brightness, especially for 3D. I just can't do that with my setup, but I'm very happy with it as is. Good luck.

Thanks very much for your comments.

I have black velvet all around the screen area on the walls and ceiling so that should block any extra light that the ST130 reflects. I just need to find out how long this order is going to take !!

Dave

I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.



Just adding another opinion to the mix....

I currently use the ST130 G3 screen material. I haven't owned the Firehawk material, but I investigated the Firehawk thoroughly over the years in which I was deciding on my screen material (as my HT was being designed and built). I have big samples of it, and I've seen the Firehawk under every condition imaginable - from brightly lit, to full light control virtual bat-cave conditions, including with the same projector models I've used in my home theater (JVC). I have a good idea of it's performance vs my ST130 material.

The upshot is: In a room that has dark surfaces and perfect light control (no ambient light) I definitely prefer the ST130. The ST130's higher gain and finer screen coating simultaneously gives more brightness/vividness/punch to the image, while also presenting a smoother image (sparkly screen structure is rare on the ST130, but quite obvious to me on the Firehawk). It also has a more natural, even illumination - I find the hot-spotting of the Firehawk quite obvious and distracting (it's brighter in the centre, dimmer to the parimeter of the image, and if you sit more to one side of the screen, the opposite side goes visibly darker than the one closer to you).

Contrast-wise, I found it interesting comparing the 8x11 samples of ST130 and the Firehawk in my home (before getting the ST130). I'd expected the Firehawk to look obviously more "contrasty," but if anything it was the opposite. The added brightness of the ST130, in a room in which light reflections are pretty controlled, tended to make image areas with very dark/bright areas look like they had better contrast (a trick to the eyes no doubt, but ultimately that's what we are doing anyway).

I've found that once I did a good job of controlling reflections I've never seen a better projected image than what I'm getting with the JVC RS20 or RS55 on my ST130 - black levels look fantastic but the image isn't remotely dull or dim, it's bright and alive. And the extra gain (over a Firehawk) allows me to blow up the image with my 4 way masking quite large, and still get nice brightness to the image.

The only screen I can see possibly replacing my ST130 is the ST100, only to get the ultimate in "invisible screen" characteristics. Unfortunately I'd take a hit in brightness, so it's likely I'll be sticking with the ST130 as the best compromise I could find, all things considered.

FWIW...

WThe black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress.

I use masking because, even though the JVC projectors do the best black levels, blacks are still visibly higher than "real black" (e.g. the screen frame and the black surrounding wall in my home theater). Bars being "not annoying" is subjective. The difference between my side masking (or top masking) being deployed - and hence being able to see the projected "black" - vs deploying the masking is very, very obvious. It just looks way better with the masking. In fact it looks best when everything is "perfectly" masked. That is, even when there is a sliver of black bar, say the type you get when you change from a 16:9 source to a 1:85:1 movie and you get an inch or two of projected black bars top and bottom, once even those are removed and the transition is made perfectly clean between movie image and black borders, it's like it "snaps" into place and becomes a magic-window effect on the scene.

That's my experience, anyway.

I use masking because, even though the JVC projectors do the best black levels, blacks are still visibly higher than "real black" (e.g. the screen frame and the black surrounding wall in my home theater). Bars being "not annoying" is subjective. The difference between my side masking (or top masking) being deployed - and hence being able to see the projected "black" - vs deploying the masking is very, very obvious. It just looks way better with the masking. In fact it looks best when everything is "perfectly" masked. That is, even when there is a sliver of black bar, say the type you get when you change from a 16:9 source to a 1:85:1 movie and you get an inch or two of projected black bars top and bottom, once even those are removed and the transition is made perfectly clean between movie image and black borders, it's like it "snaps" into place and becomes a magic-window effect on the scene.

That's my experience, anyway.

I have just a couple of comments to add. I don't know about the JVC's, but the Panasonic has no light spill to the right or left of the projected image, so in 16:9 those side bars are illuminated mainly by reflected or scattered light originating from the central image itself. Its not "projected black" in this case. In a dark bat cave with light absorbing surroundings close to the screen, those areas look very close to black. Even more so with the Firehawk due to less scattering. In fact, the only time they may not blend in with the black velvet frame is during a fade to black. Even then I don't notice them. What ruins it is if someone opens a door or turns on a light. Then you see the bars as grey because the screen is white of course. This is where I miss the Firehawk with its great off-angle light rejection. In any case, masking would take care of this. So to be cost-effective, I try not to open any doors during a 16:9 movie;).

There's another issue in that horizontal bars are more disturbing to the brain than vertical bars. This may be due to the way the eyes move about the screen during a movie, I'm not really sure. But I always eliminate those anyway by slight zooming if needed.

I have just a couple of comments to add. I don't know about the JVC's, but the Panasonic has no light spill to the right or left of the projected image, so in 16:9 those side bars are illuminated mainly by reflected or scattered light originating from the central image itself. Its not "projected black" in this case. In a dark bat cave with light absorbing surroundings close to the screen, those areas look very close to black. Even more so with the Firehawk due to less scattering. In fact, the only time they may not blend in with the black velvet frame is during a fade to black. Even then I don't notice them. What ruins it is if someone opens a door or turns on a light. Then you see the bars as grey because the screen is white of course. This is where I miss the Firehawk with its great off-angle light rejection. In any case, masking would take care of this. So to be cost-effective, I try not to open any doors during a 16:9 movie;).

There's another issue in that horizontal bars are more disturbing to the brain than vertical bars. This may be due to the way the eyes move about the screen during a movie, I'm not really sure. But I always eliminate those anyway by slight zooming if needed.

I will tell you this. There is very little difference between the top and bottom bars and my black velvet masking panels with my EN4K screen and JVC RS45. My room has flat black walls, floor and ceiling. In other words, the masking hardly makes a difference. I have it so I use it, but with this combination, the bars are not a big standout.

I will tell you this. There is very little difference between the top and bottom bars and my black velvet masking panels with my EN4K screen and JVC RS45. My room has flat black walls, floor and ceiling. In other words, the masking hardly makes a difference. I have it so I use it, but with this combination, the bars are not a big standout.

Mine blend in too, though I always fit to the full height anyway. You must have a 16:9 screen. My last point was actually about the brain-eye connection. People typically are more bothered by horizontal bars than side bars, but that's probably more on flat panels than anywhere else. I suppose either way, if they blend in with the frame, it really shouldn't matter.

How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).

I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.

The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.

I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").

How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).

I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.

The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.

I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").

Masking is definitely better, but when watching a lot of movies (except really bright day lit scenes) there is not a huge difference between my black velvet masking and the EN4K screen in my all black room. As soon as you introduce ambient light, then it is a different matter.

Guys,

I've got a Firehawk G3 screen that I'm seeing what I'd call some anomalies on. I'm wondering if they are just expected of this material of if my screen is defective and needs to be replaced or... something else.

I'm seeing what I would call horizontal bands across the screen where the image is darker. They are only visible when a bright image is shown. If the lights are up in the room and the projector is off you cannot see them at all.

I was wondering if the screen just needs to settle in from the tensioning or something else - as a home theater novice I'm just not sure. Considering the cost of the screen I'm rather concerned about this issue. Thoughts?

Thanks,
-Tyraxus

Guys,

I've got a Firehawk G3 screen that I'm seeing what I'd call some anomalies on. I'm wondering if they are just expected of this material of if my screen is defective and needs to be replaced or... something else.

I'm seeing what I would call horizontal bands across the screen where the image is darker. They are only visible when a bright image is shown. If the lights are up in the room and the projector is off you cannot see them at all.

I was wondering if the screen just needs to settle in from the tensioning or something else - as a home theater novice I'm just not sure. Considering the cost of the screen I'm rather concerned about this issue. Thoughts?

Thanks,
-TyraxusIn case you didn't, put up a white pattern or image and wiggle the PJ. If banding moves it's not the screen. If it does not move, screen. IMO, you should not get any banding from the screen. Speak to your dealer about it.

Does anyone know of a way to eliminate sparkles and screen texture seen on my firehawk g2 screen? I think it's just something that has to be dealt with when it comes to the firehawk screens but I wasn't sure if people had techniques to reduce it. It's seen mostly on light colored material and can become quite annoying. I have a fairly bright projector (lg cr181d) and I sit 13' from my 123" screen. If this is just something inherent in the screen tech, should I upgrade the material to the g3 to eliminate this?

This post is to Mark Haflich , hoping he shows up to answer:

Mark,

Thanks so much for commenting on the performance of your new Studiotek 100 material. It's very intriguing for me as I have the ST-130 material (love it) but as good as it is, my ideal is to get that "screen disappearing" effect you describe with your ST-100 snomatt.

(I now have an 8" x 11" sample of the ST-100 material. Comparing it to my ST-130, the ST-100 has obviously less blurr from optical coating when looking at pixels close up. From a distance, at least with this sample, the brightness difference seemed negligeable (there, but not terribly big difference). It's also been pointed out in some reviews of the ST-100 that due to the subtle hotspotting nature of the ST-130, darker as you move away from the centre of the screen, the overall measured difference of the entire screen surfaces of an ST-100 and ST-130 are not as far off as the gain rating suggests (as the ST-100 remains bright corner-to-corner).

So I hoped the impact of the brightness drop would be somewhat mitigated by this fact. Though, you do note definitely seeing a brightness drop.
(I have to consider these things since I sometimes view images at 130" diagonal 16:9 or 118" wide scope).

I am just about at "bat cave" performance for my room, in terms of employing dark fabrics to cut all room reflections, which is another reason why I'm considering the ST-100 material. Another thing is I absolutely LOVE even image brightness, and viewing angles that are unrestricted, for which the ST-100 no doubt excels.

Still, I admit I'm kind of surprised you found the ST-100 made such a noticeable difference over the ST-130, but it's nice to know that a performance gain in my system is a future possibility (switching to the ST-100). Any additional comments or insight you have on your new screen material would be welcome.

BTW, when you said your wife thought it was "like viewing the disc for the first time" was that a comment comparing your new ST-100 material vs your ST-130, or a comment on the Sony 1000 projector's performance?

Thanks.

Hello Rich,

Newbie here, Black Diamond 4K 1.4 and Firehawk G3 were my first choices. To my eyes, both had a bit of distracting shimmer. I have pretty much blacked out my basement where I can control the lightning. Decided to avoid the 1.3/1.4 gain materials and I have on order the ST-100 material, 110 in diagonal 16:9, Velux frame. Screen should be installed 1st week in June, will try to post my observations.

PJ is an older one, got a great deal on it, Pioneer Elite FPJ1 should have decent black levels. According to my calculations the luminance should be sufficient.

Cheers

How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).

I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.

The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.

I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").

The reason the black bars are close to matching the black velvet on my screen is the 0.85 gain VS the 1.3 gain of your screen. Makes your screen 1.5 times brighter than mine. That will be a noticeable difference in the black bars. On dark movies, the bars are nearly indistinguishable from the masking. In bright scenes, it stands out more.

Just a reminder. The Spring Fling sale ends this month.

Just a reminder. The Spring Fling sale ends this month.

Where can one find the details regarding the Spring Fling sale? :confused:

Hello Rich,

Newbie here, Black Diamond 4K 1.4 and Firehawk G3 were my first choices. To my eyes, both had a bit of distracting shimmer. I have pretty much blacked out my basement where I can control the lightning. Decided to avoid the 1.3/1.4 gain materials and I have on order the ST-100 material, 110 in diagonal 16:9, Velux frame. Screen should be installed 1st week in June, will try to post my observations.

PJ is an older one, got a great deal on it, Pioneer Elite FPJ1 should have decent black levels. According to my calculations the luminance should be sufficient.

Cheers

Great! I'll be very interested in how it works out for you.

Where can one find the details regarding the Spring Fling sale? :confused:

Give us a call. :)

Question about Stewart tensioned screens and remote control:
I was doing some research on the Stewart tensioned screens and noticed that the amount of extension of the screen comes pre-set from the factory to drop a certain distance (depending on the customer's specs). According to the owner's manual, there is some range of adjustment so you can limit or extend the drop by +/- a few inches. Does anyone know if this negatively affects the tab-tensioning system if this is done? Also there is a bewildering array of options to control the screen remotely (up and down, masking, etc). Does Stewart have a remote option (IR or RF) that permits use of a universal remote such as the Logitech Harmony One?
Hi, I am able to answer both your questions. Recently I had to replace my Stewart Firehawk due to problems that is claimed that were caused by no fully depoying my custom masking length. So yes try to get exactly the ammount of masking that is appropriate for your installation. I also utilise a logitech harmony remote to deploy my screen.

Hope I helped

Anyone have the 5D screen and care to post a pic or two with a review?

Anyone have the 5D screen and care to post a pic or two with a review?

I do not own a 5D but have seen it 3 times for a total of about 2 hours.