I have only used DVI with my Motorolla box and it has been flawless. I don't rememberthe model but it has two tuners, HD and 120GB hard drive. DVI out, not HDMI.

My LCD TV sometimes has trouble syncing to my DVD player's component outputs. I wonder if some scalers don't work well with some sources? I'd hate to think that's the case with the samsung.

~Jay

no probs with the cable box via comp I am using a 8300HD

The High Power surface seems promising for personal viewing, but I think many here may want a viewing cone larger than 30 degrees to accommodate their guests and family. The projector placement requirement may also be a limitation for some users.True. It isn't for everybody. One nice thing is that it does tend to stay fairly uniform (lack of hotspotting) moving from side to side if the projector isn't too far back or too far forward compared to the viewer, but the gain does dropoff when people get to the sides (or if there is a big vertical offset). It isn't like it is normally unwatchable from the sides as the gain is probably still higher than some screens like the Grayhawk RS from way off angle.

Here are some points off a graph I got for the High Power.

0 ----- 3.1
5 ----- 2.5
10 --- 2.05
15 --- 1.4
20 --- .95
25 --- .8
30 --- just above .7
35 --- just below .7
40 --- .65
45 --- just above .6
50 --- .6
55 --- .58
60 --- .57
--Darin

Wow, did you guys see Jason's post (Sticky) on his measurements of the 710? ~600 Lumens, calibrated, in HT mode, considerably more than the 465 reported in projectorcentral. With this level of brightness, a 110"diag Firehawk would produce 21 ftL (and the HP would put out 67 ftL!) This level of brightness sounds like it would make the 710 more than just a pj for dedicated light-controlled theaters, but feasible in a general purpose den with some ambient light. So one could use it both as a gen purpose tv, and then turn out the lights in the evening for a first class HT.

Related to this: I read that the Firehawk is essentially equivalent to the Studiotech in a 'lights out' situation (they have about the same gain). If that really correct? I.e., when one does have a light-controlled situation, does the FH really perform as accurately in colors, etc., as the ST?

This Sticky at the top of this forum? I didn't see these numbers. Did he take the info back down?

This Sticky at the top of this forum? I didn't see these numbers. Did he take the info back down?

Yes, on the sticky at the top of the page. BUT--I just went back to make sure, and IT'S GONE! He still has the 'throw' spec there, 1.56 to 2.05, but the Brightness spec is no longer there. ??? It was something like 597 Lumens, calibrated in the 'low' home theater mode, and I just rounded it off to 600; I remember quite specifically since it was quite a bit highter than the 465 quoted by projectorcentral for the output calibrated in theater mode.

Jason, ???

Hello

I have been using the samsung 710 for a few weeks now and have a few issues and observations.

The image from this projector is fantastic. I made the big jump from a NEC LT-150 to the Samsung. I am using it with a 114" Carada BW screen that I also just purchased. But I am having a few issues with black level crushing on different inputs.

Using the Component inputs with a progressive signal I have tried three different source devices and two different sets of cables, and with each of them the blacks are crushed. My primary source is a Motorola 6412 HD cable box, but I have also tried a samsung sir-t150 HD tuner and a Accurain hst-6000 HD tuner. On each I have tried all the available resolutions (480p, 720p and 1080i) with no change in the black level. I can raise the brightness to compensate some, but I have to raise it to almost 90 (from 50) to get any detail in the blacks. With it set to 90 the picture is all washed out and gray..

But when I use the component inputs with a interlaced signal (480i) from a DVD player the black levels are perfect (at the default setting of 50). The S-video is also perfect at 50.

I have also attached the Motorola and the Accurain using a HDMI to DVI cable, they both display a better and brighter image then with the component input. However there is still some black crush. If I raise the brightness from the default of 50 to 60 the black level looks correct. I think they are both outputting the digital signal at the PC signal level and not at studio level, which would probably explain the issue on the DVI port. Does anyone know for sure what levels these use?

But I would like to get the component inputs to look good. Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?
Thanks, Francis

True. It isn't for everybody. One nice thing is that it does tend to stay fairly uniform (lack of hotspotting) moving from side to side if the projector isn't too far back or too far forward compared to the viewer, but the gain does dropoff when people get to the sides (or if there is a big vertical offset). It isn't like it is normally unwatchable from the sides as the gain is probably still higher than some screens like the Grayhawk RS from way off angle.

Here are some points off a graph I got for the High Power.

0 ----- 3.1
5 ----- 2.5
10 --- 2.05
15 --- 1.4
20 --- .95
25 --- .8
30 --- just above .7
35 --- just below .7
40 --- .65
45 --- just above .6
50 --- .6
55 --- .58
60 --- .57
--Darin

So it falls to half-gain at ~ 15 deg away from head-on, right? And the total width is 30 deg, + and - 15 deg about 0 deg; am I interpretting your table correctly? So if I sit 12 ft from an 8 ft screen, the angle to the edge of the screen is ~ 19 deg, i.e., a gain of ~ 1. This is a more drastic fall-off than I had inferred from the many rave reports about the HP.

For comparison, the Stewart Firehawk says that it half-gain angle is 30 deg. Does this mean + and - 30 off of head-on, or a total angular width of 30 deg (i.e., +/- 15 deg) like the HP above?

So it falls to half-gain at ~ 15 deg away from head-on, right? And the total width is 30 deg, + and - 15 deg about 0 deg; am I interpretting your table correctly?I believe that is right, but the angle is the one between two lines. For retro-reflective, one going from a point on the screen to the light source and one going from that same point on the screen to your eyes.
So if I sit 12 ft from an 8 ft screen, the angle to the edge of the screen is ~ 19 deg, i.e., a gain of ~ 1.I'm not sure what math you used to get that. It all depends on where the projector is. If the projector was right by your eyes the gain would be close to 3 according to that chart (since the two lines would have a small angle between them even to a spot toward the side of the screen). If the projector was far away it would be much lower.

It looks like the math you used might be closer to that for angular-reflective screens, where the lines used are different. In that case one of them is from a bounce off the screen as if it was a mirror, not a reflection straight back to the light source. That is why the Firehawk drops off so much toward the edges (hotspots) in general.
For comparison, the Stewart Firehawk says that it half-gain angle is 30 deg. Does this mean + and - 30 off of head-on, or a total angular width of 30 deg (i.e., +/- 15 deg) like the HP above?I believe the Firehawk has about the same directional layer as this one:

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/engineering_specifications/videomatte200.html

except with gray to bring the whole curve down uniformily. They claim 28 degrees for the half gain angle, but it doesn't look like that matches their gain curve, which has the gain hitting the half gain line at about -44 degrees and +44 degrees. According to the definition they list there the half gain angle is for one side, so would be 15 for the High Power according to that and the numbers I got (which I was told originally came from when Stewart measured the High Power).

--Darin

I'm not sure what math you used to get that. --Darin

I assumed that the pj is sitting right in the middle of the 8ft wide screen, 12 ft away from it. I then move from where the pj is to the right until I'm looking straight ahead at the edge of the screen; i.e., I've moved 4 ft to the right. The angle from the center of the screen to me is then the invers tan of (4/12), which is about 19 deg (I don't have a calculator with me at present). And from your gain table, the gain looks like it has fallen to ~1.0 at that angle.

So the gain falls to 1/3 of its head-on value by the time one is looking straight ahead at the edge of the screen (at least if I'm interpretting things correctly).

My primary source is a Motorola 6412 HD cable box, but I have also tried a samsung sir-t150 HD tuner and a Accurain hst-6000 HD tuner...

...Does anyone know for sure what levels these use?I also have the Motorola 6412 HD cable box (an early one with DVI), but it doesn't seem to be crushing blacks. In fact I have the brightness turned down to 48. I don't know about the Accurain, but my Samsung SIR-T165 definitely uses graphics levels.


Ken Whitcomb

I assumed that the pj is sitting right in the middle of the 8ft wide screen, 12 ft away from it. I then move from where the pj is to the right until I'm looking straight ahead at the edge of the screen; i.e., I've moved 4 ft to the right. The angle from the center of the screen to me is then the invers tan of (4/12), which is about 19 deg (I don't have a calculator with me at present). And from your gain table, the gain looks like it has fallen to ~1.0 at that angle.

So the gain falls to 1/3 of its head-on value by the time one is looking straight ahead at the edge of the screen (at least if I'm interpretting things correctly).Okay, now I understand. Yep, that sounds about right. If the projector were a little bit overhead the gain sitting in the center would be a little lower than 3.0 and so moving to the side probably wouldn't make it 1/3rd of that gain, but would make it under 1.0.

As far as uniformity in your example, it looks like a spot on the right side of the screen while straight in front of it would have an 18.4 degree angle, as would a spot in the center of the screen, with a spot on the left side of the screen having a relevant angle of 15.3. That would probably come out to better uniformity than even medium gain angular-reflective screens. But I'm not sure that gain curve for the High Power really holds when getting to more extreme angles.

--Darin

Well, now that I have two SP-H710AE calibrations under my belt (BradH's and my own), it's time to post some numbers. For anyone new to gray scale calibration, the NTSC/HDTV coordinates for the color of white (D6500) are x = .313 y = .329

Note: All measurements were made with the projector set to the default Movie1 picture mode.

My post calibration results:

x = .313 y = .328 20 IRE
x = .313 y = .330 50 IRE
x = .313 y = .330 80 IRE
x = .313 y = .329 100 IRE

light output - 16.8 fL (on 45" X 80" Stewart Studiotek 130 screen)


Stay tuned, I hope to have my GrayHawk RS surface later this week. I'll be posting more observations later.


Ken Whitcomb

I also have the Motorola 6412 HD cable box (an early one with DVI), but it doesn't seem to be crushing blacks. In fact I have the brightness turned down to 48. I don't know about the Accurain, but my Samsung SIR-T165 definitely uses graphics levels.


Ken Whitcomb
Ken,

Have you attached your 6412 with the component cables?

From what you know about the controls in the service menu, do you think there might be an adjustment that would solve the black crushing issues I described above?

I am beginning to think my unit may have a defect.

Thanks, Francis

Have you attached your 6412 with the component cables?

From what you know about the controls in the service menu, do you think there might be an adjustment that would solve the black crushing issues I described above?Francis,

I just tried it, comparing the component output to DVI using several dark scenes from "Pleasantville". I'm not seeing any black crush.

What test patterns or images are you using to determine that your blacks are crushed?


Ken Whitcomb

Ken,

My source devices are all "over the air" or cable, so I have not been able to use a specific test pattern. However any scene with a dark area in it will appear as black. Also the menu's from the 6412 appear very dark. When I switch to dvi (with brightness raised to 60) or s-video everything looks normal.
With my previous projector (nec lt-150) the component outputs also looked fine...

Francis

Wanted to relate a situation with the "Picture" menu feature on the 710 to see if you all are experiencing the same situation.

Attached "DVI.bmp" image shows projector turned on and the video source with DVI input and functioning (signal going to projector with either the Comcast 6412 at 1080i or Sony 975 at 480i or 720p, same results). Notice that the "picture size", "position" and "film mode" are not illuminated as the other menu choices are. When I cursor over to try select any of the choices, only those highlighted brighter are able to be selected. When you cursor down, the cursor box just jumps over the lighter choices. Over the weekend I moved the screen to a slightly differect location and went to the picture screen to make the adjustments and found out that the "position" feature is not "selectable" with DVI. I've tried everything I can think of including restoring factory options, turning the machine off and on, unplugging and restoring factory options, connecting and reconnecting the DVI cable.

To make it more confusing, now the Component input....

"Component.bmp" image is a different Sony DVD player with an active 480p input going via component into the Samsung. With this setup, the only feature that isn't "selectable" is the overscan, which IS selectable with the DVI and an active signal.


Last..."sources off.bmp" image is with the projector selected to either DVI or Component......with all inputs turned off, which based on the manual I think is correct. From what I've read, all sources (DVI and Component included) you should be able to choose any of the "picture" menu features and then those selections are "saved" to that input.


maybe I'm just reading the manual wrong and with DVI input you can't the select "picture size", "position" and "film mode" features and with Component you just can't select and adjust the "overscan" feature.

comments please?

Maybe I'm just reading the manual wrong and with DVI input you can't the select "picture size", "position" and "film mode" features and with Component you just can't select and adjust the "overscan" feature.This is all normal. With the DVI input size and position is locked, which is one reason why some people use an external scaler to add that flexibility. Since overscan is mainly used to hide the vertical interval on NTSC broadcasts, I think the Samsung assumes that component 480p is a DVD player and the user will not want the image cropped.


Ken Whitcomb

[QUOTE=D6500Ken light output - 16.8 fL (on 45" X 80" Stewart Studiotek 130 screen)

Ken Whitcomb[/QUOTE]

So, if I did the arithmetic correctly, I come up with ~ 323 Lumens output; is this correct? Seems rather lower than the 465 projectorcentral reported (and much lower than Jason's tentative value). (I'm traveling, w/o a calculator handy, so may have made a mistake!)

Update:

Based on the above post, I went back and measured again. I used the Minolta LS-100 on a tripod directly above and behind the projector (as close to the projection angle as possible). The results are as follows:

15.36 fL* (on the Theater light setting)
20.43 fL* (on the Bright light setting)

This confirms what Joe Kane told me, that the lamp runs at 75% in Theater setting. For those wanting the maximum life from their lamp, using this mode should dramatically increase longevity.

*On my 45" X 80" Stewart Studiotek 130 screen


Ken Whitcomb

Ken,

"My post calibration results"

How much do these differ from OOTB?

Overall, is the picture much improved after cal (I know, loaded question for a calibrator).

Thanks

Thanks Ken.

Overall, is the picture much improved after cal (I know, loaded question for a calibrator).See this post: Post #211 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7374301&&#post7374301)

As far as the improvement and perceived value of the calibration, maybe BradH can chime in.


Ken Whitcomb

I know a lot has been said about the Studio Tec and other Stewart screens.

I'm wondering for the more budget concious, which of the Carada screens should someone be thinking about for a 22'x14' light controlled room with seating in the 12'-14' range for a 92" screen? On one hand I would think the BW would help with brightness, but on the other hand the High Contrast Grey may help with th eblack leves, although the gain is a bit low. Any suggestions? Any ideas what would be appropriate from Saria (sp?)? A high contrast grey w/1.3 gain from Severtson might be appropriate, but I thought those screens were aproaching the cost of a Stewart screen.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Let me start by saying that I have known Ken for about 12 years now. The first thing he ever calibrated for me was my 31” Mitz tube T.V. I was absolutely amazed by the difference in picture quality. Since then he has calibrated every display device I have ever owned, ranging from that tube to my Runco 930. It is the Runco that I replaced with the Samsung. I have always been impressed with the difference in over-all picture quality caused by calibration. The Samsung is no exception.

I will say that this projector looked better out of the box than any other device I have seen. That lead me to question whether or not calibration was necessary, but as it turns out, it was. Coming from a CRT, I did not expect black levels to be very good on a DLP. I also did not expect the colors to look as natural as they did on my 930. I was very pleasantly surprised by both. The post calibration picture left me certain that I had made the right choice with this purchase. Black levels were very close to what I was used to, especially with the Stewart Grayhawk RS and the colors looked every bit as natural, and probably even more vibrant than they did on my CRT. The thing that surprised me most, though, was the depth. I had read that the depth on a DLP is not nearly what it is with CRT, but that is definitely not the case here. The "grey scale tracking", as he refers to it, looked perfect on all the test patterns we checked. Again, this projector looked good from the factory, but looks amazing now. I was afraid that I would miss my old projector, but I have no regrets. I feel that I lost nothing and gained a brighter and much sharper image. If you are in the market for a projector, I would strongly suggest getting the Samsung and having it calibrated.

Brad

I know a lot has been said about the Studio Tec and other Stewart screens.

I'm wondering for the more budget concious, which of the Carada screens should someone be thinking about for a 22'x14' light controlled room with seating in the 12'-14' range for a 92" screen? On one hand I would think the BW would help with brightness, but on the other hand the High Contrast Grey may help with th eblack leves, although the gain is a bit low. Any suggestions? Any ideas what would be appropriate from Saria (sp?)? A high contrast grey w/1.3 gain from Severtson might be appropriate, but I thought those screens were aproaching the cost of a Stewart screen.

Any advice would be appreciated.


I would go with the Carada BW if your going with a 92" wide. There High Contrast Grey with the 710AE may not put out enough light. I believe Joe Kane recommends 84" wide and under for grey screens.

Brad

Brad,

Do you think the calibration improved the black level? That is one area I'd like to see improved on mine.

A little over a year ago I saw within a short amount of time a JVC HD2k not calibrated, then one that was calibrated by WM. The difference was significant. Especially in the black level.

I have never really liked grey screens. They always seem king of dark and dull. But maybe I have never seen one with a projector that was optimised for it.

Do you think have have compromised anything by using the grey screen?

thanks,
~Jay

I'm wondering for the more budget concious, which of the Carada screens should someone be thinking about for a 22'x14' light controlled room with seating in the 12'-14' range for a 92" screen?First, welcome to the best forum on the planet!

Carada's classic Cinema White may be the best choice for the 80" width in your environment. You really don't need gain at that size, so a screen with a coating may be worse. I wish I had personal experience with their surfaces so I could make a definitive recommendation.

Many gray screens have a tint that compensates for the red deficiency in most UHP lamps. This might be able to be calibrated out with the Samsung, but I'm not sure. The GrayHawk RS has no tint, in fact when I first saw BradH's I was sure they sent him the wrong surface!


Ken Whitcomb

Jay

No I dont feel that I have made and compromises with the Grayhawk RS. It really is more like a white screen meaning it is very light grey. At first it look like Stewart had send me a Studiotek until I held it up to my Studiotek the I could see it was a little grey. The screen did help with black levels put after calibration the blacks just came to life. Others have said that colors dont look as good on grey screens but on this one they look as good as they did on the Studiotek, with the added bonus of better blacks.

Brad

Thanks Brad,

That's good to hear... maybe I'll have to get one!

Ken, or anyone who may know.. Who is that best person in the LA area to calibrate the Samsung? I think Joe Kane is near here... but I don't know if he's availible ;)

~Jay

One more thing on calibration. The room, screen, and projector all make one system. Calibration is the only way to get them all to come together.

Brad

Jay

Just stay at 84"wide or under to keep the light output up.

Brad

hmmm .. I really like a big screen. In fact I'm running it 108" wide now. I have no screen, just a white wall.

I wonder if a 130 would be better for a large screen size?

I am also toying with the idea of a constant height 2.35:1, but that gets expensive and complicated. I think I would need a scaler and an anamorphic lens.

~Jay

Who is that best person in the LA area to calibrate the Samsung? Dave Abrams, (razorabrams@aol.com) who works for Joe Kane


Ken Whitcomb

hmmm .. I really like a big screen. In fact I'm running it 108" wide now. I have no screen, just a white wall.

I wonder if a 130 would be better for a large screen size?Jay,

For a 108" wide screen, I would definitely recommend Studiotek 130.


Ken Whitcomb

I know a lot has been said about the Studio Tec and other Stewart screens.

I'm wondering for the more budget concious, which of the Carada screens should someone be thinking about for a 22'x14' light controlled room with seating in the 12'-14' range for a 92" screen? On one hand I would think the BW would help with brightness, but on the other hand the High Contrast Grey may help with th eblack leves, although the gain is a bit low. Any suggestions? Any ideas what would be appropriate from Saria (sp?)? A high contrast grey w/1.3 gain from Severtson might be appropriate, but I thought those screens were aproaching the cost of a Stewart screen.

Any advice would be appreciated.

You may want to take a look at this review of the Carada Brilliant White Screen in exactly that size:

http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/CaradaCriterionProjectorScreen.php

An excerpt with the bottom line:

"The seamless Brilliant White screen material, with its 1.4 gain and thicker density, nearly mimics the performance of the popular Studiotek 130 screen"

I would obviously defer to Ken's expertise, but wonder if given this conclusion, and his affinity for the Studiotek with this PJ, whether the Carada BW might be the perfect match. I'm seriously considering going with this combination, as screen price is an issue for me.

KK

One more thing on calibration. The room, screen, and projector all make one system. Calibration is the only way to get them all to come together.

Brad

Is it a fair question to ask how much calibration generally costs? I realize that discussing equipment pricing is off limits, but am assuming that this is acceptable (if not, I assume someone will set me straight).

Thanks,

KK

Thanks, Ken and Brad.

Sounds like one amazing pj.

Is it a fair question to ask how much calibration generally costs? I realize that discussing equipment pricing is off limits, but am assuming that this is acceptable (if not, I assume someone will set me straight).

Thanks,

KK
I think its a fair question; I have seen quotes in the $300 to $450 range depending on what is required. To get a good idea go the isf site http://www.imagingscience.com/isf-trained.cfm and look for a qualified tech in your area and ask for a quote.

Jay

No I dont feel that I have made and compromises with the Grayhawk RS. It really is more like a white screen meaning it is very light grey. At first it look like Stewart had send me a Studiotek until I held it up to my Studiotek the I could see it was a little grey. The screen did help with black levels put after calibration the blacks just came to life. Others have said that colors dont look as good on grey screens but on this one they look as good as they did on the Studiotek, with the added bonus of better blacks.

Brad

Is it correct to say that for a light controlled room, the GRS is preferred for improved blacks, but for a room with some ambient light, the 130 is preferred for the gain? (sorry screen newbie)

Dave Abrams, who works for Joe Kane


Hey Ken, any recommendations for someone in the Raleigh/Durham NC area?

To get a good idea go the isf site http://www.imagingscience.com/isf-trained.cfm and look for a qualified tech in your area and ask for a quote.Unfortunately, the ISF website will not tell you who has the correct instrumentation (NIST-referenced photo-colorimeter). Also, JKP offered a training seminar specifically for the Samsung projectors. There are only about a dozen calibrators in the country that attended this.


Ken Whitcomb

Is it correct to say that for a light controlled room, the GRS is preferred for improved blacks, but for a room with some ambient light, the 130 is preferred for the gain? (sorry screen newbie)No apology needed, we were all newbies once. :)

It's not an issue of light control, but of size. Below 84" wide, the GrawHawk RS will provide the best black levels. Above that, the gain of the Studiotek will be needed.


Ken Whitcomb

Here are a few pictures of just how light grey the screen is.

One picture with a white piece of paper in the corner.

A few with out. I didnt use any flash so in real life the screen looks even grey.

Brad

I took the jump and ordered my 710 from AVS 2 days ago.

I'm really looking forward to getting this up and running. I'm hoping to be finished with my HT in a few weeks *knock wood* and by then, Ruben (SandmanX) should have everything sorted out with the accoustically transparent weave he's been testing. Yay!

Update:

Based on the above post, I went back and measured again. I used the Minolta LS-100 on a tripod directly above and behind the projector (as close to the projection angle as possible). The results are as follows:

15.36 fL* (on the Theater light setting)
20.43 fL* (on the Bright light setting)

This confirms what Joe Kane told me, that the lamp runs at 75% in Theater setting. For those wanting the maximum life from their lamp, using this mode should dramatically increase longevity.

*On my 45" X 80" Stewart Studiotek 130 screen


Ken Whitcomb

Ken, Just back in town, and I saw that Jason has new post claiming 612 Lumens for the 710 in Theater Mode. Is that consistent with your result above? I calculate that this output would produce 32 ftL with a 1.3 gain screen; am I doing this correctly?

Dave Abrams, (razorabrams@aol.com) who works for Joe Kane


Ken Whitcomb


Any suggestions for persons in the NYC area?

is this projector too dark to use with a Firehawk 1.25 gain 123" diagonal screen? I'm getting conflicting results and would love another opinion. So far, for brightness I'm headed towards the IN76 but it's review here has left me questioning my decision. I still have two weeks to decide on a projector so any help is welcomed.

Umm yes this is the best projector I've seen anywhere near the price. Put the thing next to the 3-chip Sony LCOS if you want an eye opener. And the SPH710 is only 1280 x 720!!
For a few grand more there is the SPH800 (even harder to find at this point) with less noise in the blacks and 8 segment color wheel. Samsung has done very well with these. But where can I find a SPH800?

is this projector too dark to use with a Firehawk 1.25 gain 123" diagonal screen? I'm getting conflicting results and would love another opinion.Mitch,

It will be bright enough. You will just have to run the lamp in the bright mode. You already own the screen, right?


Ken Whitcomb

Any suggestions for persons in the NYC area?Contact Kevin Miller (kevin@isftv.com)

Ken Whitcomb

Well, I think I'm really leaning toward the Samsung now.

Do any of you live within a two hour drive of Cleveland? Just wondering if I could check out the 710 in action and I wouldn't mind making a weekend trip. Unfortunately, looking at some of your names, I see California, Florida, etc. A little out of my driving range for a short visit. :)

Thanks,
George

Mitch,

It will be bright enough. You will just have to run the lamp in the bright mode. You already own the screen, right?


Ken Whitcomb

I am also using a 123" Firehawk 1.25 gain screen. I am also curious how the Samsung compares in brightness to the Infocus IN76. According to Jason's numbers, they are similar:

IN76
Light Output (Normal Mode): 615 lumens
Light Output (High Power): 736 lumens

Samsung
Light Output (Theater Mode): 612 Lumens
Light Output (Bright Mode): 808 Lumens

My arrangement necessitates the use of lens shift (which apparently rules out the IN76)--does lens shift degrade the quality of the image in any way?

Dear Forum Members,

We are thrilled to hear about so many home theater enthusiasts enjoying the image quality provided by the Samsung 710. In skimming through the posts here on the forum it appears there are a couple general themes that we would like to comment on to help assist in better pictures...

1. Mounting the Projector

The projector needs to be mounted level and not angled at a distance 1.55 to 2.0 times the width of the screen. It is also important to note that the lens needs to be centered with the screen and not the projector. The vertical positioning of the projector is based on the lens, where the lens needs to be within height of the screen. More specifically the projector cannot be mounted higher or lower than the screen without introducing angle and using the keystone correction. When using keystone correction the projector introduces scaling, as with all projectors on the market, this scaling of the image causes a loss of resolution and is not recommended in any installation.

2. Pixel Mapping

Yes the projector will do 1 to 1 pixel mapping at 1280x720 provided that the keystone adjustment is not being used as mentioned above.

3. Screen Size

As with many projectors on the market the Samsung can accomodate a large range of screen size, but just like any other projector on the market the projector has screen sizes that is performs best at. We have found that the projector performs best at screen sizes from 5 feet wide to 9 feet wide. The projector's native aspect ratio is 16x9 (1.78:1) and as such requires a screen of the same aspect ratio for optimum performance.

Outside of the above mentioned screen sizes the projector's light output either becomes too bright or too dim when referenced to SMPTE standards. It is important to note that if the image becomes too bright it will be difficult to view in a dark theater enviornment and if this image is too dim it will not have the contrast necessary to provide a realistic image.

4. Screen Materials

Currently JKP only endorses the Stewart Studiotek 130 and the Stewart Grayhawk RS screen materials. These screens have been test by JKP and have a near flat spectral response with an excellent viewing angle allowing the screen to accurately reproduce the image being projected. With the Samsung 710 we are recommending a that for screen sizes smaller than 84 inches wide the Grayhawk RS material and for screens larger than 84 inches wide the Studiotek 130 material as they will allow optimum light readings after calibration of the projector. These recommendations are based on non-perforated screens as a significant amount of light lossed when using a perforated screen and is not recommended with DLP projection technology.

The nice thing about using a smaller screen with the GrayHawk RS is that it deals with ambient light very well, whereas the StudioTek 130 reflects more light and doesn't discern the difference between the light from the projector and the ambient light in the room causing the image to appear more washed out.

Please keep in mind that these are recommendations for optimum picture quality and not the end all answer. Technically a room with any ambient light would be considered a compromise; however, it is often known as the "real world" and we understand that many people of have to build systems around rooms that have ambient light in them.

Ken,

Thank you for the recommendation for calibration in Los Angeles, but the correct email is PrecisionTheater@aol.com :)

Happy Viewing!

David Abrams
Project Coordinator - Joe Kane Productions

Mr. Abrams,

May I make a suggestion for future projectors that you or Mr. Kane may be involved with? An inclusion of a 1.33x vertical stretch mode, necessary for creating a proper 2.35 constant height setup, would have made this projector quite a bit more desirable to some of us enthusiasts. I cannot justify the additional expense of a 1000$+ scalar and must regrettably pass on this wonderful projector (which I really would have loved to have owned).

Lindahl,

Thank you for your suggestion. At this point in time we do not see the advantage in having such a mode on a fixed pixel projection system and currently do not endorse it. There are many technical reasons for this, I will touch on a few of them here.

When using such as system the pixel structure is being blown up to a larger size making the artifacts more visible at the same seating distance.

We have also found that the current lenses for doing a 2.35 stretch are not as good as the standard lenses, instead they cause significant image distortions. In fact the pincushioning caused by many of these lenses has caused at least one major screen manufacturer to produce a screen that helps compromise for the faults of the lens to attain better geometry. In essence the screen manufacturer is trying to create a product that corrects a faulty product. The optimum solution would be to correct the lens so that it does not distort the geometry of the image.

In the future perhaps the technology and the benefits for such an option on a fixed pixel display will be more prominent. With what is currently available a technically better image is achieved without a 2.35 contast screen and stretch mode.

Best,

David Abrams
Project Coordinator
Joe Kane Productions

4. Screen Materials

Currently JKP only endorses the Stewart Studiotek 130 and the Stewart Grayhawk RS screen materials. These screens have been test by JKP and have a near flat spectral response with an excellent viewing angle allowing the screen to accurately reproduce the image being projected. With the Samsung 710 we are recommending a that for screen sizes smaller than 84 inches wide the Grayhawk RS material and for screens larger than 84 inches wide the Studiotek 130 material as they will allow optimum light readings after calibration of the projector. These recommendations are based on non-perforated screens as a significant amount of light lossed when using a perforated screen and is not recommended with DLP projection technology.

The nice thing about using a smaller screen with the GrayHawk RS is that it deals with ambient light very well, whereas the StudioTek 130 reflects more light and doesn't discern the difference between the light from the projector and the ambient light in the room causing the image to appear more washed out.



Any specific comments re the Stewart Firehawk screen? I have read in the Stewart literature that it is supposed to approximate the behavior of the Studiotech very closely, only with better rejection of ambient light and, consequently, a narrower viewing angle.

Mitch,

It will be bright enough. You will just have to run the lamp in the bright mode. You already own the screen, right?


Ken Whitcomb

thanks Ken. I was hoping to find a projector that I could run in low mode and then switch to high mode when either I needed additional lumens due to ambient light, or when the bulb started to take a dive. My firehawk is on order and is due to ship on 4/6.

This answer has me wavering on which projector to get and I'm still not convinced that the 710 is right for my screen (possibly on the border of brightness and no trigger which is minor).

If only the IN76 measured contrast ratio hadn't have come out so low. It would have been a perfect match. Possibly I'm putting too much weight on that measurement...

Dave,
Re:The vertical positioning of the projector is based on the lens, where the lens needs to be within height of the screen. More specifically the projector cannot be mounted higher or lower than the screen without introducing angle and using the keystone correction. When using keystone correction the projector introduces scaling, as with all projectors on the market, this scaling of the image causes a loss of resolution and is not recommended in any installation.


I may be misunderstanding you, but this unit has a vertical lens shift, right? I thought the whole point of having this feature is so that you could mount the projector slightly above or below the screen without having to use keystone??

I am also using a 123" Firehawk 1.25 gain screen. I am also curious how the Samsung compares in brightness to the Infocus IN76. According to Jason's numbers, they are similar:

IN76
Light Output (Normal Mode): 615 lumens
Light Output (High Power): 736 lumens

Samsung
Light Output (Theater Mode): 612 Lumens
Light Output (Bright Mode): 808 Lumens

My arrangement necessitates the use of lens shift (which apparently rules out the IN76)--does lens shift degrade the quality of the image in any way?

whoa, I missed those numbers fugueness. That puts both projectors on an even keel except for the nod to performance going in the more expensive 710 direction. Hmmmmm, this is getting my interest again. Now I need to go and re-check black levels and contrast ratio to see if the addl $$ is justified.

Any specific comments re the Stewart Firehawk screen? I have read in the Stewart literature that it is supposed to approximate the behavior of the Studiotech very closely, only with better rejection of ambient light and, consequently, a narrower viewing angle.

+1 on the question millerwill. I purchased the Firehawk screen due to multiple issues with my room and I thought I was purchasing the best screen for almost any projector (1.25 gain) as well as the material due to ambient light (using a great room as a theatre + addl black level). Furthermore, since my viewing angle is narrow, I was not worried about off axis gain as much as most other users would be. I hope I did not make the incorrect choice.

Dave,
Re:The vertical positioning of the projector is based on the lens, where the lens needs to be within height of the screen. More specifically the projector cannot be mounted higher or lower than the screen without introducing angle and using the keystone correction. When using keystone correction the projector introduces scaling, as with all projectors on the market, this scaling of the image causes a loss of resolution and is not recommended in any installation.


I may be misunderstanding you, but this unit has a vertical lens shift, right? I thought the whole point of having this feature is so that you could mount the projector slightly above or below the screen without having to use keystone??

I'm also confused about this (just when I thought I had also understood offsets and lens shift). I assume this means that the shift allows it to be raised to the top of the screen (but not further, which would result in a keystoned image). I would certainly appreciate if Mr. Abrams could explain this.

BTW, I just pulled the trigger and ordered this PJ from AVS. Since our dedicated HT room will have a 9'4" ceiling, this means a long pole mount, which I was hoping to avoid. All in all, I'm still thrilled with the purchase.

KK

I asked this in the IN76 thread also. Am I correct in thinking that I would be wasting money on the more expensive 710AE vs the IN76 due to my room? The room I'll be using is a family great room, tan walls, tan carpet, and a vaulted (up to the 2nd story) tan ceiling. Thus, purchasing the 710AE over the IN76 would be pointless as I'd never see the contrast and improved black level it has to offer just due to the room?

whoa, I missed those numbers fugueness. That puts both projectors on an even keel except for the nod to performance going in the more expensive 710 direction. Hmmmmm, this is getting my interest again. Now I need to go and re-check black levels and contrast ratio to see if the addl $$ is justified.

Mitch just my thoughts being a photographer and having to deal with images for a living numbers are one thing but color accuracy is a whole new game
I somehow think that even though the numbers are the same the Samsung might have a better pic ?
so what I care about is how those numbers look and more important all the numbers in-between and how they do and what they do which to me is put out great color ;)
again totally just my thoughts
so also to answer your is it a waste ? I am like you and have the non perfect room but I would rather have the best I can get since some will go away I would rather have more to begin with than less
also the color I do get to keep is going to be much nicer I think ??
totally my thoughts but based on who helped design this what the prev model went for and the quality of the unit
also what I have read so far about the 76 I am thinking they are both going to be killer projectors but I think the idea of the 710 is that it is accurate which to me is more important

to me the CR is better which is going to give a better pic in a darker room
if you have your lights off with the screen you have I think you will see a better pic ;)
if you are viewing with the lights on ?? then they both will be the same but with the lights off if you can get the room pretty dark I can no think that you wont see a better pic
I can say this comparing my sharp to this 710 with 1 hour before sunset blinds closed still lots of light the other day just for fun to see how this PJ did I was blown away at how much better it did !!!
totally blowed away the other one
in a darker room it was closer but again the 710 was better hands down
but what got me is with some light in the room the pic was very watch-able where the other was not that good to washed out
and this was on a white screen as I have yet to order a gray based screen ;)

at least for me another thing is build quality !! 710 2x the weight and I have to think its going to be nicer buiid
things like the adjust feet are so smooth on the samy and every thing just feels quality

The lens shift question is important as I am placing the shelf tomorrow. I thought that the projector could be placed above the screen without keystoning!

thanks for the comments Honu. I'm shying away from the contrast ratio wars due to the fact that my room is not controlled. See this thread for the effects of ambient light on CR

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5719375#post5719375

I'm seeing that the light output is very similar and I have now come full circle and am looking very seriously at the H710AE again. Sure sounds like the color accuracy and details are better with this vs the cheaper IN76 (unfair as they are two diff price points) but I really need to weigh my decision based on money/performance. If my room negates any performance advantages that the H710AE has to offfer, then I don't want to spend the extra money.

With that said however, if I am viewing at night I may still realize a better picture with the H710AE. Ugh, buying sight unseen is tough!

Summary - the contrast ratio due to my room is a wash. My tan walls will reflect enough light back to the screen to negate any CR improvements betweent he IN76 and H710AE. What about black levels though? Jason did mention the IN76's black levels weren't up to other comparable units. I believe the H710AE had a decent review with regards to black levels? So +1 to the sammy here. Now what I don't know is color accuracy. I'm pretty sure this also goes to the sammy just due to Mr. Kane's input on this pj as I don't believe specs would uncover this? Any other advantages that the sammy has over the IF? Lense shift is a big one. IF has two digital inputs however as well as screen trigger. But I'm more interested in the better picture.

"Ugh, buying sight unseen is tough!"

Mitch P,

I feel your pain. I agonized with the same 2 PJs and ended up ordering the Sammy yesterday from Jason. My room is light controlled w/mostly dark walls, so i don't have that issue to contend with. Honu says his Sammy significantly beat his old Sharp in a twilight environment FWIW, but its hard to know how that relates to the IN76. I'm also confused by the apparent difference between Ken W's brightness measurements and Jason's, however, Jason's figures are at least derived from use of the same equipment and should be directly comparable.

I just wanted to let you know that AVS has a 30 day no questions return policy, which influenced my decision. Since they sell both PJs, i assume you could swap before the credit card bill comes due if you are dissatisfied. I opted for the Sammy based on Jason's suggestion that the IN76 was a great value for the $$$$ but the extra cost for the 710 was worth it if it wasn't a budget buster. I assume at least some of your viewing will be after dark. If the 710 performs better at those times you would at least have the benefit of its advantages at those times. In the overall scheme of HT expenditures, the $$$ difference is pretty small if you get a better picture some of the time.

Best of luck,
jv

Mitch I read that ;) thanks for the link

I can say though I am a bit confused by the post ?
unless I read it wrong (havent had my coffee yet)
It sounds like its one projector he is using so I dont see how comparing one projector against itself can do anything but the logical more light in a room less CR ?
but what about comparing 2 or 3 projectors against each other and what your eyes will see
also I enjoy movies when its dark out and the little one is tucked in for the night so thats when it matters most the rest of viewing is just a bonus

I agree the brighter a room the less perceived CR you will see but at the same time I still think if there is more to begin with there is less to loose and numbers are one thing but your eyes and what you see are going to be dif when comparing one PJ to another
I guess my analogy comes from trying it myself with two projectors side by side and both HD2+ chips both in more ambient light conditions and at night with all the lights out

I have light walls and can tell you that yes you will have some wash back but a darker screen really helps this out (I am ordering a HCMW screen I think this week) but having had 5 projectors in my house I can say without any prob that the wash does not make them all equal at all and the Samsung when compared directly came out ahead by a decent amount
since the Mitsubishi HC3000 is a great pj as is the sharp DT-400 I cant say the H710 blows them away but I can say that even my wife was like WOW that pic is so much better and at least enough for me worth the extra $$ I spent on it and remember I also have light walls
from reading so far it sounds like the IN76 is more like the Mitsubishi HC3000 than the Samsung which makes sense with the price etc..

again my own eyes in a house with light walls and carpet the 710 is easily better by a good amount over the other ones I have had here and in low light before sunset drapes drawn it blew it away which is saying a lot
just trying to share more thoughts with you ;) since we seemed to be going down the similar path

Enkidu2,

But where can I find a SPH800?

Contact Joe Kane Productions. The reason it's difficult to locate is due to the fact that there are special requirements to serve as a dealer. This projector must be mated with a JKP approved screen and the dealer must have the ability to calibrate it correctly, using the right instruments.

I spent more time in Joe's demonstration room than any other at CEDIA EXPO last September. This was due to the simply amazing images he was showing on the screen. He had various movies on WMV9 HD files that were some of the best looking pictures I've ever seen.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Samsung claims a 2000 hr. lamp life. Does anyone know if that is in Theater Mode?
Also I have done a search for replacement lamps but came up empty, any idea on where and how much?

Thanks

I'm also confused by the apparent difference between Ken W's brightness measurements and Jason's, however, Jason's figures are at least derived from use of the same equipment and should be directly comparable.I suspect that the difference in measured results may be the screen material used. I left Jason a voice mail to see if I can get clarification on this.

If he is using a Vutec SilverStar of similar size to my Studiotek 130, his numbers would come pretty close to what I measured. I'll post additional information after he gets back to me.


Ken Whitcomb

Samsung claims a 2000 hr. lamp life. Does anyone know if that is in Theater Mode?
Also I have done a search for replacement lamps but came up empty, any idea on where and how much?

Thanks

http://www.partstore.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductSKU=7583371&ProductType=ACCS
this was a link someone posted earlier to the part number for the bulb
so just under $250

Lindahl,

Thank you for your suggestion. At this point in time we do not see the advantage in having such a mode on a fixed pixel projection system and currently do not endorse it. There are many technical reasons for this, I will touch on a few of them here.

When using such as system the pixel structure is being blown up to a larger size making the artifacts more visible at the same seating distance.

We have also found that the current lenses for doing a 2.35 stretch are not as good as the standard lenses, instead they cause significant image distortions...

With what is currently available a technically better image is achieved without a 2.35 contast screen and stretch mode.

Best,

David Abrams
Project Coordinator
Joe Kane Productions
WOW... that was a rather sobering post for me as the H710AE is at the top of my pj short list and I am in the process of building a dedicated CIH 2.35 setup. May be a good reality check...

http://www.partstore.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductSKU=7583371&ProductType=ACCS
this was a link someone posted earlier to the part number for the bulb
so just under $250
Thanks Honu. The part # for that lamp does not agree with the part # from the owner's manual which is BP47-00010A.

Thanks

Lindahl,

An inclusion of a 1.33x vertical stretch mode, necessary for creating a proper 2.35 constant height setup, would have made this projector quite a bit more desirable to some of us enthusiasts. I cannot justify the additional expense of a 1000$+ scalar and must regrettably pass on this wonderful projector (which I really would have loved to have owned).

"Picture quality" is often equated with "viewing experience" in the home theater community. Unfortunately for many consumers, they have never had the pleasure of being exposed to a truly reference image. Joe Kane's display system design philosophy can be partly understood from his motto, "It's all about the art."

Image fidelity and display accuracy are lofty goals that are challenging to achieve in the home. They are impossible to achieve without an understanding of and regard for imaging industry standards and practices. Individual consumer preferences can be in conflict with industry standards. This can occur when a certain viewing experience is desired that does not hold image fidelity and original artistic integrity as superior priorities. It's OK to consider other priorities more important for your home and your individual viewing experience. Just understand that certain experiences will result in consequences to image fidelity with the current state of technology and your apparent budgetary constraints.

Personally, I will avoid trying to implement a constant image height system using a 1280 x 720 display and DVD as a signal source. A 1080p display option, with HD DVD or BD as a signal source, will be less problematic. Even then there will be definite image degradation without sufficient quality (expensive) light output, optics and processing.

It would be much less challenging to implement an automasking screen and to simply move closer for a wider viewing angle with 2.35:1 movies. Yes, you can increase the utilization of more vertical pixels on the display's chip with an anamorphic lens and expensive processing. However, this does not increase the native image data in the program signal. The horizontal pixel structure stays the same. Some people think that they can live with visible pixel structure for the sake of having a wider image viewing angle. I cannot. It's just not acceptable to me to see sky and every other object in an image given texture. Real sky isn't composed of pixels.

The distortions that come with certain viewing experiences can be overlooked by some people. I don't choose to make those kinds of compromises for myself and, like JKP, am reluctant to recommend them in general. I've witnessed convincing demonstrations of constant image height systems. However, not for extended periods of time. Such demos have also been on VERY costly systems. I caution everyone who attends demonstrations to take into account that much more is revealed about a system's performance when it is lived with over time.

I have never been disappointed when following Joe Kane's recommendations over the years. It would be great to have a constant image height display system in my home. I think it's very cool to mask a screen from the ends with drapes, like many commercial movie theaters do. Perhaps this option will be attainable some day, without noticeable image distortions, and without unacceptably high cost.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

theater master ;) yup not sure myself I just know someone on another post had this link and was told that it was the same one ?

the hours I dont think they say what mode its in for the 2000

"Picture quality" is often equated with "viewing experience" in the home theater community. Unfortunately for many consumers, they have never had the pleasure of being exposed to a truly reference image. Joe Kane's display system design philosophy can be partly understood from his motto, "It's all about the art."

Image fidelity and display accuracy are lofty goals that are challenging to achieve in the home. They are impossible to achieve without an understanding of and regard for imaging industry standards and practices. Individual consumer preferences can be in conflict with industry standards. This can occur when a certain viewing experience is desired that does not hold image fidelity and original artistic integrity as superior priorities. It's OK to consider other priorities more important for your home and your individual viewing experience. Just understand that certain experiences will result in consequences to image fidelity with the current state of technology and your apparent budgetary constraints.George,

Thank you for your eloquent response, I couldn't have said it better myself. I've been trying to get across that this was designed to be a true reference product, and therefore should inherently perform better than the typical consumer projector. The fact Joe Kane specified that it be good enough for exacting post-production work in the transfer of film should be enough explanation.

It's like getting BMW M3 performance for the price of a Corolla!


Ken Whitcomb

That was a very cool post by GeorgeAB. It reminds me that image quality is always at the top of my list.

That being said...

Ken- I am sure you are aware of the new Optoma 7100. It is supposed to have superior optics and contrast for a videophile performance. Do you have any comments on expectations for the new Optoma versus the Sammy?

Dear Forum Members,

The image shift provided by the Samsung and the majority of projectors on the market allows it's positioning relative to the screen height. In an ideal system we would place the projector in the dead center of the screen so that the distance from top to bottom and left to right are as equal as possible. This allows for the best focus from the lens. When the projector is placed towards the top of the screen the distance the light travels to the top of the screen is shorter than to the bottom - this may cause minor focus issues. The same theory applies if the projector is mounted at the bottom of the screen. While we try to evaluate projectors with the lens in the absolute center of the screen for the best possible performance; our demo theaters often have the projector placed on the ceiling, at the top of the screen, as we like to sit in the ideal viewing position and don't want the projector in the way. Once again while focus may suffer slightly, it is minimal.

The lens shift allows for the projector to be place anywhere from the middle of the screen to the top and bottom of the screen without performing keystone. Many projector manufacturers who produce projectors without a lens shift are setting the projector up to go at the top or bottom of the screen ONLY - not anywhere between. It also requires the installation to be a lot more precise.

There are some images at the bottom of this post that may assist in understanding how to position the projector. We created these to help assist the calibrators who have attended our setup/calibration classes for the product.

Notice the lens can be slightly above the screen material but just barely. If you are pushing this to the extreme be careful in your installation so that you have enough range in the shift.

In regards to those inquiring about the Stewart FireHawk screen. While this screen serves the purpose of assisting in high ambient light conditions, it does so at a cost of spectral response and viewing angle. It fits a need, but it does sacrifice enough video quality where we, JKP, do not endorse it. It helps to counter the effects of a compromised viewing environment. If one screen fit all applications screen manufacturers would not need to create product lines as one screen would fit all. Unfortunately not every home theater has the perfect viewing environment and not every projector has the right light output for any size screen. As such we have many different screen with varying gains and materials to accommodate the various situations that are encountered when setting up a video system.

Regards,

David Abrams
Joe Kane Productions
Project Coordinator

I'm on a roll with the questions here:

First: Can I rent Colorfacts and acheive a good calibration on the Sammy? I have seen it in action many times and feel I have a good handle on it.

Second: I read somewhere that the HD2+ chip that the Sammy uses is prefered by many to the DC3 chip. Someone also claimed that perceived screendoor would be less on the HD2+.

Can anyone confirm or deny these ideas?

Ryan

In regards to those inquiring about the Stewart FireHawk screen. While this screen serves the purpose of assisting in high ambient light conditions, it does so at a cost of spectral response and viewing angle. It fits a need, but it does sacrifice enough video quality where we, JKP, do not endorse it. It helps to counter the effects of a compromised viewing environment. If one screen fit all applications screen manufacturers would not need to create product lines as one screen would fit all.

David, Thanks from all of us for your very clear remarks and explanations. I am surprised, though, to hear your comment about the 'spectral response' of the Firehawk (I well appreciate the reduced viewing angle); for I have read many comments from Stewart that it has 'absolutely no spectral shift', only a reduced brightness (due to the gray screen). In fact, I think it is the same gray as the Gray Hawk, but with added structure to focus the light more in the forward cone. I respect the rigor of JKP and your conservative recommendations, but this comment does seem at odds with what Stewart says.

millerwill,

The original GrayHawk did not have a flat spectral response and was actually blue and not gray. Stewart asked JKP to help in redesigning the GrayHawk so that it had flat spectral response and a better viewing angle, this is known as the GrayHawk RS. We have tested the FireHawk in the past and while it's characteristics may have been similar to the original GrayHawk we have not tested a sample that has spectral response like the GrayHawk RS. This does not mean that Stewart hasn't redesigned the screen on their own, but simply that we have not seen one that has been corrected.

Here it is also important to note that we have not seen any products on the market that would compete with the FireHawk in the situation that one would be used in.

Regards,

David Abrams
Joe Kane Productions
Project Coordinator

millerwill,

The original GrayHawk did not have a flat spectral response and was actually blue and not gray. Stewart asked JKP to help in redesigning the GrayHawk so that it had flat spectral response and a better viewing angle, this is known as the GrayHawk RS. We have tested the FireHawk in the past and while it's characteristics may have been similar to the original GrayHawk we have not tested a sample that has spectral response like the GrayHawk RS. This does not mean that Stewart hasn't redesigned the screen on their own, but simply that we have not seen one that has been corrected.

Here it is also important to note that we have not seen any products on the market that would compete with the FireHawk in the situation that one would be used in.

Regards,

David Abrams
Joe Kane Productions
Project Coordinator

David, Thanks again for a helpful response. I'm not sure when you last tested a Firehawk; the one they produce now is called the 'Firewhawk G2', which I understand is a modest modification of the original FH (slightly less gain, slightly wider viewing angle, and less tendancy to 'hotspot'). Anything further that you find out about it would certainly be appreciated by me, and I'm sure others here, who do have less than ideal room situations.

I am surprised, though, to hear your comment about the 'spectral response' of the Firehawk

I'm a Stewart dealer, have attended their product trainings in the past, but I have no recollection of the statements that you are remembering. Their web site's product descriptions make no such claim for the current FireHawk G2 that I could find. Someone may have voiced such a claim, but I haven't found any official statement that resembles, 'absolutely no spectral shift.' I would be happy to acknowledge such a statement if you can document it for me.

I respect the rigor of JKP and your conservative recommendations

I've typically found that JKP's recommendations are practically focused and precisely defined. If that's what you mean by conservative, I fully agree. Precision is essential when working in the field of imaging science and display standards. When I advise my clients on display system design compromises, it's essential to understand the benefit or consequence factors behind every desision.

After all the various elements in the system are evaluated and prioritized, the rubber hits the road when the lights go out and an image is viewed for hours on end by the person who paid for it all. It's that image that has to be ultimately satisfying and should fulfill the program producer's intent as much as possible. Professionally, my duty to the customer is to listen to what they think they want but also recommend what I know to be technically correct for their specific application. The art of custom system design is in balancing personal taste with technical performance.

Display viewing environment issues are a sticky wicket for most home theater designers and sales people. Many professionals lack a sufficient grasp of how room conditions and human perceptual factors impact system performance. To expect customers to voice their design preferences based upon any understanding of these issues is usually folly. When potential customers have asked me what projector or screen I recommend for a home theater, I've told them flatly, "I don't." Until I know a lot more about them, their room, and their budget I would only be wasting my time to recommend anything. The FireHawk is a great screen, but it is designed for specific applications, with unique performance characteristics that must be understood for it to fit in a system correctly.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I'm a Stewart dealer, have attended their product trainings in the past, but I have no recollection of the statements that you are remembering. Their web site's product descriptions make no such claim for the current FireHawk G2 that I could find. Someone may have voiced such a claim, but I haven't found any official statement that resembles, 'absolutely no spectral shift.' I would be happy to acknowledge such a statement if you can document it for me.

You are certainly correct that my 'sources' are comments and testimonials in these various threads; and they are indeed far from consistent with one another. I will search through some of my collections of various comments tonight to see if I can find some specific ones, but at best they are just someone's opinion. The one that sticks most in my mind is that the Firehawk was designed to be as close to the Studiotek as possible (they have essentially the same gain), and that in a totally dark (i.e., light-controlled) room they are effectively indistinguishible. (They are very different, of course, with any ambient light present.) But again, this is just someone's opinion; I will try to find the specific thread.

George or David (if I may use your first names), re: constant height.

Would you say that using constant height with 2.35 to fill the field of vision is not desirable at 720p due to the resolution? Whereas, the answer would be different for a 1080p projector, since you can move in close enough to fill the field of vision without noticing SDE, pixelization and other artifacts, for someone with decent vision? Or is it more about the comprimise that scaling introduces at 720p as opposed to 1080p?

On a side note, I really like the feeling of a filled vision on 2.35, the same effect on 16:9 and 4:3 requires too much eye movement because of the extended height - what would you recommend the best way to get this feeling? Moving the seating is not exactly an easy thing to do, is there a system that facilitates this perhaps? I certainly understand that this projector is targetted for customers who want no compromise in a reference image and, thusly, wouldn't think about doing constant height. However, as a non-videophile, a full field of vision appeals more to me as long as I can get 95% (subjective number) of a reference image.

Thanks,
Brian

Dear Forum Members,

There are some images at the bottom of this post that may assist in understanding how to position the projector. We created these to help assist the calibrators who have attended our setup/calibration classes for the product.

Notice the lens can be slightly above the screen material but just barely. If you are pushing this to the extreme be careful in your installation so that you have enough range in the shift.

Project Coordinator


I am a bit surprised (sadly) about the lens shift properties of the samsung, if those numbers are right. According to an official brochure I downloaded in the past, I thought that the lens shift was 240% of the screen height, not 110%...meaning I thought the center of the PJ's lens could be placed as far as 20% higher than the screen's height, not 5%...Could any owner or reviewer comment on this?

I mean can the PJ be only placed max 5% above the screen or can it go as high as 20% above the screen? For a 106in diag screen, this would mean going from maximum 10,4 inches above the screen to 2,6 inches above the top of the screen, which would really break the deal for me...

I am a bit surprised (sadly) about the lens shift properties of the samsung, if those numbers are right. According to an official brochure I downloaded in the past, I thought that the lens shift was 240% of the screen height, not 110%...meaning I thought the center of the PJ's lens could be placed as far as 20% higher than the screen's height, not 5%...Could any owner or reviewer comment on this?

I mean can the PJ be only placed max 5% above the screen or can it go as high as 20% above the screen? For a 106in diag screen, this would mean going from maximum 10,4 inches above the screen to 2,6 inches above the top of the screen, which would really break the deal for me...

I certainly read the projectorcentral review to be as you say re the lens shift.

You are certainly correct that my 'sources' are comments and testimonials in these various threads; and they are indeed far from consistent with one another. I will search through some of my collections of various comments tonight to see if I can find some specific ones, but at best they are just someone's opinion. The one that sticks most in my mind is that the Firehawk was designed to be as close to the Studiotek as possible (they have essentially the same gain), and that in a totally dark (i.e., light-controlled) room they are effectively indistinguishible. (They are very different, of course, with any ambient light present.) But again, this is just someone's opinion; I will try to find the specific thread.

GeorgeAB: OK, I looked up some old posts (I print out relevant ones and keep them in a folder--ancient technology!).

(1) From the thread 'Stewart FireHawk vs Carada Brilliant White', dcarty posted on 11-08-05, "The Firehawk was designed by Stewart to approximate the performance of the Studioteck in less than ideal viewing circumstances. Having compared the Firehawk and the Studiotek side by side I can say that from dead-on they do look practically identical. Where you experience a difference is moving outside the narrower viewing cone of the Firehawk you see the drop-off."

(2) In the projectorcentral.com review of the Stewart Studiotek and Firehawk, on pg 2, they state "The Firehawk has the same neutral color and high resolution as the Studiotek."

And I do remember other posts testifying that the gray screen FH does not cause color shifts. But in any event, I do appreciate the professionalism and dedication to perfecton of the JKP enterprise; it's great that they are pushing the envelope. But there are a lot of us that are interested in the performance of projectors and screens in less than perfect light-controlled situations, but still want the highest PQ possible. In this regard, I greatly value the evaluations of persons which know more about all this than I do (which is just about everybody!).

Stef,
I agree...is Dave's statement a "ideal" setup recommendation to use the best part of the lens? Or is it the actual physical limitation of the projector?

Dear Forum Members,

The lens shift allows for the projector to be place anywhere from the middle of the screen to the top and bottom of the screen without performing keystone. Many projector manufacturers who produce projectors without a lens shift are setting the projector up to go at the top or bottom of the screen ONLY - not anywhere between. It also requires the installation to be a lot more precise.

There are some images at the bottom of this post...Notice the lens can be slightly above the screen material but just barely.
Regards,

David Abrams
Joe Kane Productions


David,

Thanks so much for your efforts to clarify this and other important issues with this projector. I'm extremely enthusiastic about this projector and am waiting for it to arrive.

My specific concern is that the top of my 54x96 screen will be at 82" and my rear row will be on a 12" riser. If I have 5% clearance above the screen, my PJ will need to be mounted no lower than ~84" according to your guidelines. Since this will put the PJ a little lower than I'd like in the room (especially relative to the rear row) I would have preferred to mount it higher, as I believed was possible from the Samsung literature (which states picture height +240%) {link: http://www.samsung.com/Products/ProAV/HomeTheaterProjectors/files/sph710.pdf}. For this reason, I'm very interested if keystone correction becomes absolutely necessary above or below the 105% shift noted in your post. This concern echoes those of Archbushman and Stef, who appeared to be as confused as I am.

Also, does that calculation refer to the center of the lens? I realize this is a trivial difference, but every inch will matter in our setup from an aesthetic perspective.

I'll look forward to your reply. Regardless, thanks for your efforts (and Mr. Kane's) in the design of this exciting projector. This will be our first front PJ system in a new dedicated theater, and we're looking forward to the leap forward.

KK

The owners manual is online at samsung.com from page 19

Diagonal Image Size

110"

Throw Distance

12.5' to 16.4'

Distance from Lens Center
to Image Bottom

4.5"

44.8' Throw would give 12.3" Distance and a 300" screen

The owners manual is online at samsung.com from page 19

Diagonal Image Size

110"

4.5"



Interesting...that number isn't consistent with the JKP recommendation, though. 54x0.05=2.7" (not 4.5").

KK

Greetings

In regard to the vertical lens shift question, I addressed with Jason Turk at AVScience the discrepancy between what was stated in the Projector Central review and the Samsung literature as opposed to the statement of David Abrams in this thread. He confirmed that it was his understanding that the vertical lens shift is limited to within the parameters of the screen. He even went so far as to test it on his unit to confirm his understanding. He suggested that the Samsung figure was either a misprint or it might be based on using the keystone correction, but that was only a guess.

kktt,
I'm in a similar situation...My back riser is almost 12 inches high and if I have to put the projector that low, it will not only look stupid, but could actually block someone's view from the back row. Many of us don't have "ideal" setups in the "real world" and that's why the lens shift feature is so valuable... I have a Sanyo z4 now and the 2.0 throw and great horizontal and vertical lens shift allow it to be placed almost anywear and make installation very easy. I'm considering upgrading to the Samsung, but now am not sure if it will work with my setup. I wish more of the mid range DLP projectors incorporated the lens shift features of the lower priced LCD's. Is this a cost issue? It doesn't seem like it would be an expensive feature to add...

Back to the Benq 8720?

Brian,

Would you say that using constant height with 2.35 to fill the field of vision is not desirable at 720p due to the resolution? Whereas, the answer would be different for a 1080p projector, since you can move in close enough to fill the field of vision without noticing SDE, pixelization and other artifacts, for someone with decent vision? Or is it more about the comprimise that scaling introduces at 720p as opposed to 1080p?

Both the resolution and potential scaling artifacts on a stretched and enlarged image would be of equal concern with a 720p projector and slightly less so with 1080p.

On a side note, I really like the feeling of a filled vision on 2.35, the same effect on 16:9 and 4:3 requires too much eye movement because of the extended height - what would you recommend the best way to get this feeling? Moving the seating is not exactly an easy thing to do, is there a system that facilitates this perhaps? I certainly understand that this projector is targetted for customers who want no compromise in a reference image and, thusly, wouldn't think about doing constant height. However, as a non-videophile, a full field of vision appeals more to me as long as I can get 95% (subjective number) of a reference image.

I'm not understanding your first sentence. The most prominent visible problem, potentially, is the recognition of pixel structure. That is a function of seating distance and personal visual accuity. The only way to predict how wide of an image from a particular display will start revealing pixel structure is to sit in front of a demo of the projector being considered. You would locate the point away from the screen where you no longer can detect pixels and measure the distance vs. screen width. That ratio would then allow you to calculate how wide your proposed screen image could be from your desired seating location. Every smaller aspect ratio image within that width would apear even more smooth.

Seating distance will also relate to how noticeable any other artifact will be. Image artifacts become more recognizable as you get used to the picture produced over time. Artifacts distract from the image content that's provided in the source signal. The object of maintaining optimum image quality is to approximate a sense of reality, or at least the time and place being portrayed in a movie's story. Even with television programs or sporting events we all like to get a sense of "being there." Distortions in the sound and/or picture tend to disrupt the "willing suspension of disbelief" we all seek to achieve in home theater.

Both the film and video industries agree that approximately a 30 degree viewing angle provides sufficient peripheral field of view to induce a persuasive sense of envelopment or involvement. Imaging scientists found through their human factors research that increasing the width of the image beyond 30 degrees only achieved minimal gains in perceived involvement. This effect will vary somewhat with different individuals.

Cinerama is no longer with us because production and exhibition costs could not be sustained by audience support. Cinemascope is still popular and a sustainable format because film quality can deliver a pleasing enough image with anamorphic 35 mm technology. IMAX has been hanging on by the skin of its teeth for years. It remains to be seen if constant image height display systems in the home can deliver convincing image quality vs. what it costs to produce a pleasing enough image with the technologies available to us. I love the concept but the challenges of preserving image fidelity and overall picture quality are substantial and complex.

There are so many elements for each person to consider. Is a significantly larger investment in equipment really worth it, in light of the fact that only certain movies are produced in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio? Personally, I don't require constant image height to fully enjoy Cinemascope movies. My local constant image height commercial theater doesn't have enough lamp horsepower to display a "Scope" film without a disturbing drop in image brightness. I definitely would not recommend the use of the Samsung 720p projector for CIH application.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I just tested mine and it is about the same as the H series Optoma's, within the screen border unless you use keystone. And that is a 100" diag screen. Any more and it started to trampese. And that was at 13' from the screen.

Dale

I'm not understanding your first sentence... Both the film and video industries agree that approximately a 30 degree viewing angle provides sufficient peripheral field of view to induce a persuasive sense of envelopment or involvement. Imaging scientists found through their human factors research that increasing the width of the image beyond 30 degrees only achieved minimal gains in perceived involvement. This effect will vary somewhat with different individuals.

Even though I didn't articulate my question well enough, the above response answers it. The 30 degree angle is what I was talking about when I mentioned the "full field of vision". Thanks.

Both the film and video industries agree that approximately a 30 degree viewing angle provides sufficient peripheral field of view to induce a persuasive sense of envelopment or involvement. Imaging scientists found through their human factors research that increasing the width of the image beyond 30 degrees only achieved minimal gains in perceived involvement. This effect will vary somewhat with different individuals. That is interesting given that the THX recommendation for commercial theaters is 36 degrees minimum for any seat in the house. Meaning that every seat would have at least a 36 degree viewing angle for wide screen material and most would be a fair amount higher. 26 degrees is their requirement for the least for any seat, meaning that seats in the center of the theater are still a fair amount higher than 30 degrees. I think I've figured out the numbers before for the center seats, but I'm feeling too lazy right now to run them again.

--Darin

Is this the confusing image

Hi all,

I wanted to know if owners/experts know if this PJ could be used with a 60"x140" constant image height screen. The lumen output seems a little low but the projectorcentral.com review says that this pj is brighter than some pj's rated at above 1000 lumens. I am going to use a prismasonic lens and like this projector's larger throw ratio. Up until 3 hours ago I was convinced of getting the HD72 but it seems like the high praises for this PJ might be worth the extra thousand or so dollars. On the other hand, this pj requires an external scaler and though I plan to buy one I thought I would wait until the new HQV or VXP based scalers/deinterlacers come out - but the release dates for these devices are constantly getting pushed back. So its hard to decide. I wanted to be sure that this projector is worth the added trouble or should I just stick with my original plan. Thanks.

I set up a Sammy yesterday on a DaLite Matte White screen and w/out using any test discs yet it appears to me as if there is a bit of an orange cast to red. One particular example is on the Superbit "Fifth Element" the button that General Munro is ready to press in the scene where Leeloo is first recreated IIRC should be red but it definitely has an orange tint. Just wondering what others are seeing and how one would potentially go about correcting this?

Other than that there is much to like about this PJ. On a 100" screen w/ no gain there is plenty of brightness and the shadow detail is excellent. Blacks are as good as I have seen, or can recall as its been a long time since I've played w/ a CRT, the space scenes in "Fifth Element" are inky black. The scene in "Fellowship Of The Rings" where where Frodo is sitting in a field when Gandalph comes riding up is amazingly 3D. In another scene when the Hobbits are running into the forest for the first time and they fall the image is so vivid that I can almost smell the decaying leaves. I could go on but bottom line is that this is an excellent PJ and an outstanding value. If it is in your budget go for it you will be very pleased!

On a different issue I'm wondering what is the likelyhood of the DVI input working w/ Blu Ray DRM material?

Thanks

first I would like to thank everyone who offered advice about the Sammy H710, since it was all the excellent reviews from you guys and Jason that led me to make the purchase. I currently have a digital projection Ivision HD which I purchased from AVS about a year and a half ago, some may know this unit as the projection design action one series, this unit is and hd2+ unit with 1000 lumens and 2300:1 contrast it shows and excellent bright,sharp and very filmlike image. The projector has been giving us intermittent what looks like bulb issues, it still works but once in a while we it would lose light output although the fan would still be running, a simple shutdown of the projector and a restart and all would be well again. Since its out of warranty my wife and I decided to look for another projector to replace the Ivision HD and later have it repaired and keep as a backup, I liken this strategy to that of some that still have and wont part with their NEC HT1000 because they like it so much, in any case we purchased the Samsung and it showed a very nice picture indeed however there were issues and let me say that what I and a few others have experienced may be isolated incidents, this was MY experience with MY setup so your mileage may vary. The first problem was that the cablebox ( motorola MOXI HD pvr) was not compatable with any progressive resolutions, 480p,720p would simply flash the image on the screen temporarily then disappear, similar to a hdcp problem but I had no such issue with my Ivison HD, in the end it was concluded that the cablebox would likely need a firmware upgrade which was something my cable company was not even willing to investigate, the strange this is that 1080i and 480i it did lock onto an HD image and all I can say is WOW, it was the best HD I had seen ever. The next problem I had was a problem one that was first noted by one of the early posters of the samsung it seems that in some lighter scenes such as sky scenes blocking compression artifacts show up, this im very sensitive to since it reminded me of the denon 5900 I purchased some years ago which had the macroblocking issue and quickly returned. I saw these artifacts in lord of the rings when gandalf comes to the village to visit bilbo bagins, as he is standing at the door there are several sky scenes behind him , here is where I started seeing the artifacts, I also saw them in batman returns when Bruce wayne enters the temple of Raz al gul, the light around him in the doorway as he enters is filled with these blocking artifacts, a quick review of several more movies proved to have the same result. I have the denon 5910 which has both hdmi and dvi and can output the signals simultaneously so I hooked up my old projector to it and had them both going at the same time showing an image from the denon and my original projector did not show any of these artifacts that I could see. Now I must mention that I do believe that because of the limitation of current dvd resolutions these are compression artifacts that are always present and my setup with the denon 5910(dvi & hdmi with adapter) makes them very revealing and so it was with regret that the samsung was returned, its a great projector dont get me wrong but it just did not work in MY setup, I would like to take this time to thank Ken Whitcomb for speaking with me on the phone about my issue and I do believe that like rainbows this may be and individual and not widespread issue. I would also like to thank Jason Turk and AVS for their continued service that was provided to me, we really wanted the samsung to work in our setup but in the end we knew it would not. We have since decided to look at the benq 8720, among other things this will allow us to take full advantage of the 10bit processing of the benq and the hdmi output of the denon 5910 CI. I did call Jason who said that he did not notice any of the artifacts to which I was referring, he is using a denon 3910.

That is interesting given that the THX recommendation for commercial theaters is 36 degrees minimum for any seat in the house. Meaning that every seat would have at least a 36 degree viewing angle for wide screen material and most would be a fair amount higher. 26 degrees is their requirement for the least for any seat, meaning that seats in the center of the theater are still a fair amount higher than 30 degrees. I think I've figured out the numbers before for the center seats, but I'm feeling too lazy right now to run them again.

--Darin

I agree that this '30 deg' recommendation seems a bit off; it leads to a viewing distance of 1.9 x screen width, whereas THX's 36 deg rec leads to the 1.5 that the majority of people in front projection seem to follow (and many sit at even closer distances). The 'rule of thumb' that has often been quoted as the 'design goal' of HDTV is 1.5 x screen diagonal, which is 1.7 x screen width.

I am very disappointed to hear that the vertical lens shift of the samsung is much more limited than initially advertised in the official brochure and on Projector Central. This greater lens shift made it perfect for my setup, but now that I know the PJ can only be placed 5% above the top of the screen, it doesn't fit my theater any better than the H78DC3, which can also be placed about 5% above the top of the screen...Why are those lenses shift specs always so large (HD72, HC3000) or so small (H78DC3, H710AE)...I know lens shift is only one of the characteristics of a projector, I'm just disappointed to learn this Samsung won't fit my place as well as I thought it would...

There's obviously much confusion, misunderstanding, foggy recollection, speculation and opinion on this matter of viewing angle. Film exhibition standards are for much larger seating schemes and much finer resolution images than home theater display systems. The 30 degree viewing angle recommendation for HDTV is well documented and widely observed. This recommendation is for the average viewer, with good eyesight, viewing a 1920 pixel horizontal resolution without visual detection of pixel structure.

I have found that many consumers seem oblivious to picture artifacts. Most imaging industry professionals and videophiles are not so forgiving of image defects and distortion. Personally, a 30 degree viewing angle is a bit too close for me with 1280 x 720 displays. I can regularly recognize pixel structure and that tends to be a distraction for me. Here are some worthwhile technical articles that should be of interest to those of you who prefer to have documentation for such issues. I will add more references as I have time to dig the stuff up:

THX Tech Pages for cinema: http://www.cinemaequipmentsales.com/athx2.html

'Maxing Out Resolution Optimize Your Seating Distance For Your Screen Size'.
by David Ranada: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=1137&page_number=1&print_page=y

'Psychophysical Analysis of the "Sensation of Reality" Induced by a Visual Wide-Field Display' by T. Hatada, H. Sakata and H. Kusaka, SMPTE Journal, Vol. 89, pp. 560-569, August 1980. http://vrsj.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ic-at/ICAT2003/papers/91117.pdf

'Pixel Per Degree Calculator': http://home1.gte.net/res18h39/calculator.htm

'HDTV displays: How good do they need to be?' from 'Broadcast Engineering': http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv-displays/

http://www.hdlibrary.com/viewtopic.php?t=37&highlight=viewing+distance - note the comments from HDTV historian Dale Cripps

'HDTV and the Resolving Power of the Eye': http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/Tech-Corner/Hoffner_features.shtml

Viewing Distance Calculator: http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Excellent links, George. Thanks. These should be stickied somewhere. Is there anything related to the best aspect ratio for human vision? I'm curious where the 2.35 aspect ratio came from.

I think that the confusion on the amount of lens shift may result from not specifying the zoom when quoting %'age relative to image height. As you zoom this projector in and out, the top of the image does not move (assuming a ceiling mount). Therefore the % of screen height that the lens can be placed above the image varies with the zoom. At maximum zoom it is a smaller %'age than it is at minimum zoom. In other words, the maximum height that you can place the projector would be achieved when the projector is at minimum zoom, i.e. farthest from the screen. I suspect that 5% above the screen and 10% above the screen may both be true statements, one being true at minimum zoom and the other at maximum zoom.

I haven't mounted the projector yet as the room is still under construction, but if I have time I will try this on the weekend from a table top and let you know if my assumption is correct. I'm pretty sure it will be... meaning that this projector may fit in more room situations than some of you are thinking.

I am very disappointed to hear that the vertical lens shift of the samsung is much more limited than initially advertised in the official brochure and on Projector Central.

This is also very disappointing for me, as this was a major consideration for my home theater set up (I'm currently using a Panasonic AE900). I had gone for the IN76 but then realized that it lacked lens shift, so I switched to the Samsung. Now that the Samsung's lens shift advantage seems to have fallen by the wayside, which is the superior projector? Brightness and color fidelity are more important to me than contrast. I am projecting onto a 123" Stewart Firehawk G2 screen. Any thoughts?

Here's a little more HDTV development history from Dale Cripps:

"The history of the 30 degree field of view is quite interesting. When NHK decided that they would apply resources to creating "the next generation oftelevision" they began with exhaustive research using real viewers all wired up as if taking lie detector tests. They scaled programming and displays using various distances or fields of view and they found that the level of human involvement in the program increased until it maxed out at 30 degrees (field of view). The TV engineers then set to work on determining what parameters would be needed to have that field of view without any visible artifacts.

They also determined in these physical tests that a wider aspect ratio was needed, not so much as a replica of the movie shape, but to keep bandwidth from being too great. A 30 degree field of view on a 4:3 screen required a greater than 30 MHz bandwidth, but if you were to cut the top or bottom off you could hold to what was at that time the limit of their devices. To achieve an artifact free image the engineers determined that it should be widescreen (5:3 was the first choice) and that there should be at least 1000 lines top to bottom and 2000 sample points across each line. That would leave no visible artifacts (this was before compression artifacts were introduced) to distract from the involvement in the image. Sharpness would be at the limit of the human visual system's capacity to see. I used to know the exact measurement in arc seconds but can't recall now. So, with the color gamut opened up it was and remains the most perfect replicate of an image designed to fill a 30 degree field of vision.

As I recall it was determined that you could get a tiny bit more involvement if you went further but the price for doing it was too great--a steeply diminishing return. That 30 degree field of view has translated over the years to mean 3 times the height of the picture. It all started with this polygraph-like examination of real viewers looking at real programs under varying visual parameters, It all has a scientific basis. Cheers, _Dale"

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I think that the confusion on the amount of lens shift may result from not specifying the zoom when quoting %'age relative to image height...I suspect that 5% above the screen and 10% above the screen may both be true statements, one being true at minimum zoom and the other at maximum zoom.

I haven't mounted the projector yet as the room is still under construction, but if I have time I will try this on the weekend from a table top and let you know if my assumption is correct.

Good points--I'll be looking for the results of your little experiment. What you note makes sense, though.

Viewing distance = 3 x screen height leads to a viewing angle of 33 deg, right in the middle of the 30 deg angle described above, and the THX max recommended angle of 36 deg.

PS But the difference between 30 deg and 36 deg is not trivial: for a 8 ft wide screen (110"diag), the former suggests a viewing distance of ~ 15 ft, and the latter gives a bit over 12 ft.

This is also very disappointing for me, as this was a major consideration for my home theater set up (I'm currently using a Panasonic AE900). I had gone for the IN76 but then realized that it lacked lens shift, so I switched to the Samsung. Now that the Samsung's lens shift advantage seems to have fallen by the wayside, which is the superior projector? Brightness and color fidelity are more important to me than contrast. I am projecting onto a 123" Stewart Firehawk G2 screen. Any thoughts?

From what I've gleaned from these threads (and individual discussions with those who have seen this projector vs. competing products) it seems reasonable to conclude that:

1. The color fidelity of this projector is outstanding, and perhaps its greatest strength.
2. Brightness is also seemingly equivalent to the IN76, and certainly much better than you might conclude by looking at tech specs, which seem to overestimate substantially the relative output of many competing projectors.
3. Darks might be a bit better on some projectors (e.g., the DC3s like the 7100) but shadow detail on this projector is second to none.

Keep in mind that I haven't received my projector, but these conclusions are a consensus of other impressions.

KK

Here is a link were Mark Robinson from Stewart posted on the Firehawk G2
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=585541&page=4
post #112.

Brad

Bill,

The THX max is for film projection, not HDTV displays. Digital cinema wants a 4k image standard to compete with film. That's a 2,000 x 4,000 pixel image. Film exhibition standards and practices do not fully equate with HDTV.

Three picture heights is a nice simple number, probably a more suitable term of reference for ease of communication and calculation. However, that figure is for a 1920 pixel image not 1280. The 720p format has half the resolution of 1080i/p.

Some of these posters should consider raising their screen if the height of the projector and lens shift are such big issues. SMPTE's human factors research allows for a maximum image height of 15 degrees to screen center and 35 degrees to screen top.

A year ago, this projector was selling for about $12,000.00 retail. It's a terrific value. It's replacement has the newest 720p chip and color wheel, plus some additional improvements. The model 800 sells for $12,000.00.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

After more viewing I think my earlier concern regarding an orange cast to reds was largely unfounded. I'm still wondering if anyone has insights as to running Blu Ray DVD's through the DVI? Will the DRM prevent viewing a high def signal?

Thanks

The DVI input is HDCP compliant.

Thank you George and thank you for the links. :)

My intention is not to drag this thread through the mud, but is everyone ignoring the fact that this PJ has reported banding issues?

I am ready to buy a PJ right now and this one was at the top of the list. I watch this thread constantly to see if anyone has worked around this problem. But it seems to go unmentioned.

Was the banding reported in the other thread only on that unit or is everyone experiencing it through the DVI input?

It has been reported in the other thread that this is simply an issue with the 8 bit processing of the DVI port, however, I have been looking at quite a few PJ's lately (some with DVI connections) and have not seen this type of banding over DVI.

Am I blowing this issue out of proportion? Are you guys not seeing the banding? If you don't have the banding problem, could you post your source equipment?

Like I said, I'm ready to purchase now, I just want to be sure this PJ is the one...

Thanks

Adam I was the one who made the most recent posting of banding/blotchy artifacts, and I'm hoping that my experience isnt a widespread one, I happen to be very sensitive to these types of artifacts, you must make this distinction for yourself, its very possible that my experience as well as the few others are isolated ones, dont forget there is more than just the projector involved, other components play a part in producing the image including source and source player, settings and so on, FOR ME, I decided to step away from 8 bit processing and take advantage of 10 bit processing since it seems like a waste to have a denon 5910 and not take advantage of that, its theorized that 10 bit will minimize some of these types of artifacts such as the banding which really never bothered me before because I know that that is a limitation of dvi and I see that on my current projector but it doesnt make it objectionable to me what is objectionable is the moving mass of blotchy, blocky artifacts that I see and so I have decided to step into a higher form of processing mainly 10 bit, as I said your mileage may vary, purchase from a reliable dealer whether it be AVS or TVauthority, they want you to be happy with your purchase, they both have an excellent return policy, I was able to a great deal of testing and only put 7 hours on the unit. I can attest to the strengths of the projector that all have discussed here, the colors are fantastic and the image is very revealing, maybe too revealing because it seems that this projector can be so revealing that with the right setup may reveal the very weaknesses and limitations of 480i dvd & dvi , some may be bothered by it and others may not. You indicated that you wanted to be sure that this projector was "the one" the only way to do this is to experience it for yourself.

They also determined in these physical tests that a wider aspect ratio was needed, not so much as a replica of the movie shape, but to keep bandwidth from being too great. A 30 degree field of view on a 4:3 screen required a greater than 30 MHz bandwidth, but if you were to cut the top or bottom off you could hold to what was at that time the limit of their devices.

I wonder, also, if 4:3 was abandoned partially due to the the more pleasing golden rectangle (~1.618:1), especially since the first considered aspect ratio was 5:3, or 1.66. Not only is it a 'magic' mathematical number, but it was, by the greeks, considered the most pleasing rectangular shape for the human eye.

In math: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldenRatio.html
In history: http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=4201
In imagary: http://fotogenetic.dearingfilm.com/golden_rectangle.html

This thread is probably not the best place to continue this discussion, but fun, nonetheless.

From GeorgeAB:
"Some of these posters should consider raising their screen if the height of the projector and lens shift are such big issues. SMPTE's human factors research allows for a maximum image height of 15 degrees to screen center and 35 degrees to screen top."

That's pretty far up. It may be 'allowable' by SMPTE standards but I'm stretching every penny to obtain an immersive and comfortable environment. In my case, the Samsung would produce a 16:9 picture (distance from lens to screen of 14.5') with 4.5 degrees to screen center and for a 2.35:1 picture the center would be 7 degrees up from eyeball. Less than perfect but probably acceptable. I guess this means no laying on the floor with pillows.

My intention is not to drag this thread through the mud, but is everyone ignoring the fact that this PJ has reported banding issues?

I am ready to buy a PJ right now and this one was at the top of the list. I watch this thread constantly to see if anyone has worked around this problem. But it seems to go unmentioned.

Was the banding reported in the other thread only on that unit or is everyone experiencing it through the DVI input?



There are enough reports of this problem to be concerned (relative to the total number of owners reporting their findings on this forum). I know that I'm concerned that there are either some defective units making it past QC, or there is a problem with any number of source combinations.

For those not experiencing this phenomenon, it is easy to ignore. However, it was clearly bad enough for some to have returned their projectors.

I'd sure like to see the issue addressed.

My intention is not to drag this thread through the mud, but is everyone ignoring the fact that this PJ has reported banding issues?
Thanks

just want to make sure since I posted a bunch in that thread I saw some probs but they were not banding

I have seen two scenes that had artifacts, but since then no probs ;)
but I have not seen any banding issues just the two blocking issues
and as I have said the pic is so nice I am willing to live with maybe and a big maybe seen one small issue for the great color and pic this pj gives overall
and I really only noticed this when looking for it
having to go back and replay the first one for my wife and try to point it out should tell you how small a prob it was ;)
conversation was kinda like no honey look here wait I will do it again ok one more time did you see it ?? no OK let me try again OH cool OK you think you saw it :)

also I think one of the probs was off the Oppo player which has known macro blocking probs with some other components

in this price range everything has its compromise and the compromise is with certain components and certain signals that one might see banding etc..
but again the pic quality is so good that I notice so much more detail and everything else that I would much rather live with the superior pic quality all the time than be looking at muddy blacks all the time or noisy shadows all the time etc....
just watching band of brothers again on episode 6 and I really cant believe how much nicer this is than my plasma and for sure my other sharp dt-400

so maybe the analogy would be to say if shadow detail is not as good in another PJ should one be worried ?? if this is the case then almost all projectors will fall short of this one in the price range

also one thing that DNIe can also make things look funny ?? to me its like any fake extra boost usually has a down side kinda like the brilliant color or whatever they call it on the HD72 and the mits HC3000 looks good on a few bright scenes but the rest of the time causes more probs than its worth
turning that on I noticed that it can make certain bright scenes look a bit fake
so for me it stays off

Bill,

The THX max is for film projection, not HDTV displays. Digital cinema wants a 4k image standard to compete with film. That's a 2,000 x 4,000 pixel image. Film exhibition standards and practices do not fully equate with HDTV.

Three picture heights is a nice simple number, probably a more suitable term of reference for ease of communication and calculation. However, that figure is for a 1920 pixel image not 1280. The 720p format has half the resolution of 1080i/


George, Thanks again for your patient (and helpful) discussion; I'm an amateur in HT and just trying to learn. But yes, I am focused on 1080p rather than 720p--currently have a Mits 73" 1080p dlp rptv (like it immensely, just planning for something BIGGER next round!)--and will actually be waiting for a single chip 1080p dlp pj, like the Optoma HD81 that will be out this year, or one from Samsung (next year?). So I'm used to the RP crowd talking about '1.5 x screen diagonal' as the optimum for the 'full immersive experience' with 1080p rptv's. [1.5 x screen diagonal = 3 x screen ht for 9x16 screens.] With good HD sources, sitting at 9 ft from my present set (1.5 x diagonal) is great, and 8 ft away (1.3 x diagonal) is even better (IMO); closer than this is too close even for me! All of which confirms, I guess, that viewing distance is a very individual matter, and one size does not fit all. My tentative plans are for a 110" screen, sitting ~ 12 ft away (~ 1.3 x diagonal ~ 2.7 x screen ht).

...so maybe the analogy would be to say if shadow detail is not as good in another PJ should one be worried ?? if this is the case then almost all projectors will fall short of this one in the price range...

Not quite the same as the rather pronounced banding that some have posted pictures of, and others have also experienced.

Let's at least try and compare apples to apples. ;)

bubbawilly ;)

having that pj and knowing that the thread only Romy101 posted pics ?
and he was using a Oppo which has know issues and HD boxes are not all known to be the best ? and cable and ?? to many variables to call it a prob from one person posting pics
nobody else posted pics ?some then stated thats what they see with all dvi connections ?
and it is a very common thing with DVI
and only one other person I think it was brad who saw some rings around the sun ?? now was that a DVI issue or not ? we dont know really

so is it a DVI limit and this PJ is just so clean and good its showing the dvi limits ?

or is it a actual problem ? I guess that is what I meant to say and if it is a DVI limit then its something that we all have to live with some more than others on super clean sets that show the weakness of a signal and wont fuzz it over like my sharp ?

I just am not sure its a prob with the PJ ??

and I still stand by my thoughts of thinking its a DVI issue just like noise in dark areas etc.. certain projectors show certain weakness more than others thats all this one shows the weakness of dvi while others are weaker in other areas

hope that makes more sense

I think that the confusion on the amount of lens shift may result from not specifying the zoom when quoting %'age relative to image height. As you zoom this projector in and out, the top of the image does not move (assuming a ceiling mount). Therefore the % of screen height that the lens can be placed above the image varies with the zoom. At maximum zoom it is a smaller %'age than it is at minimum zoom. In other words, the maximum height that you can place the projector would be achieved when the projector is at minimum zoom, i.e. farthest from the screen. I suspect that 5% above the screen and 10% above the screen may both be true statements, one being true at minimum zoom and the other at maximum zoom.

I haven't mounted the projector yet as the room is still under construction, but if I have time I will try this on the weekend from a table top and let you know if my assumption is correct. I'm pretty sure it will be... meaning that this projector may fit in more room situations than some of you are thinking.

My room happens to be set up perfectly to do this test. I have an 11' ceiling and the projector is curerntly about 6-7' off the ground.

I need to do this test before I mount it properly, so I'll do it tonight. It'll really test me wife's patients! But I'll explain to her how important this is to the bretheren here;)

~Jay

I decided to measure lens shift range.

The Projector is about 160" from the screen, the lens is 80" above the floor. The projector is as level as I could get it.

I zoomed the image to it's smallest size:
With the lens shift all the way down the top of the image was 75" above the floor.
With the lens shifted all the way up the bottom of the image was 85" above the floor

I zoomed to make the image as large as possible:
.... and to my supprise..
With the lens shift all the way down the top of the image was 75" above the floor.
With the lens shifted all the way up the bottom of the image was 85" above the floor

The results were the same whether zoomed in or out.

I'm glad I did this test, my plan was to mount the projector much higher. I think it is in a good spot now.

~Jay

Thanks, Jay. This was very helpful for me. Our room is being built in an attic. To try and preserve optimal viewing distance to the front row of around 12.5' we'll need to have a slight ceiling slope at the front (screen) wall that results in a maximum plate height of 7', which will dictate the maximum height of the screen. Currently that will mean the top of the screen itself (minus border) will be at just under 81" (planning on a Carada Criterion in BW). It looks like I'll probably be able to mount the projector no higher than around 84".

Our original plan for mounting the projector called for a 15' distance to our screen, which would have placed it over the 12" riser and a danger to anyone over 6'. To help us with installation, our builder was going to place a 2x2' plate at framing so we'd have some flexibility in positioning. Given this enlightening discussion, we'll now have the PJ just in front of the riser above the first-row seatbacks. Since we hope to move forward soon, this discussion came just in time--thanks to all who clarified this issue.

KK

Iam at work and going off memory :eek: (if Ken gets on today he has true numbers). The top of the viewing surface is 14.5" from ceiling. The top of the focus ring is 15" from ceiling. The center of the lense is 18" from ceiling. Front of lense is 14ft from screen. 83.75" wide. When moving the lense down all the way there is still 3.5" of shift left.

Brad

Looks like the Manual is very close Jay got the image to shift 5" above at 13.3' the
manual lists the shift at 4.9" at 13.6' this from the center of the lens.

Can someone please help me clarify all this info?? I have not purchased this pj yet, but it is my top pick at this moment.

My intention was to ceiling mount at about 12 ft. back. I have not purchased a screen yet but I am hoping that a 100"- 106" screen may work in my HT. First row of seating at 11'6" and second row at 14'6" or so. The second row will be on a riser-I'm thinking about 9 or 10 inches due to low ceiling and AC ducting along one wall. My room is 12'6" x 20'6" with only 7 ft height. Will my plans work with this unit in the light of new understanding of limited lens shift??

BTW, Honu, thank you for the valuable input. I appreciate your insight given your artistic eye!! Color and clarity are very important to me in assessing the PQ!!!

Kamull at 12' back a 106" screen will work..., but just barely. You will be at the largest screen size for 12' throw with the 106."

If your projector is flush mounted to the ceiling, your screen will need to be mounted such that the top of the image area is within about 6" of the ceiling. The lens shift will give you enough to move about 4" outside the image area of the screen, but if you do that you will lose some image quality. You never really want to be at the extreme ends of either zoom or lens shift.

So your projector will be mounted between the seating rows, so it should not be in the way of anyone accessing the rear row. How high your screen is off the floor or below the ceiling will depend on how far below the ceiling the center of the projector lens is after mounting.

Another thought might be to mount the projector behind the last row of seats and then you could go with a 122" screen and be in the middle of the zoom range instead of towards the ends.

Hi all! Great thread here and it's pretty much convinced me to go with the H710AE when I'm ready to buy in a few months. :D

I was just wondering if anyone knew what DVD player Joe Kane uses when he demos this unit? I figure he'd probably go to the trouble to get the whole setup to look as good as possible. To my understanding, Mr. Kane would be using a Stewart screen (either Studiotek130 or GreyHawk RS), but I haven't seen it mentioned what DVD player he uses.

It seems fairly likely to me that at least some of the "issues" mentioned with this unit (such as banding or blocking, etc.) might be coming from the source - ie. the DVD player or the HD cable or satellite box. I'm not saying this is always the case, but from everything I've read so far, it seems like it could certainly be a possibility in at least some of the cases. In particular, when using the Oppo DVD player, I imagine people could easily be seeing macroblocking since this is a known issue with the Oppo.

In any case, I don't have a DVD player with digital output yet, but I'd very much like to get one when I get this projector. I just thought that Joe Kane may be using a specific DVD player in order to get the best results, so I figured that might be a good DVD player to consider :o

Any help is much appreciated and thanks so much for all the great info on this exciting projector!

Jon

Two years ago he was using a Bravo DVD player and a MCE PC at CES. He said he prefered the Bravo for DVDs over the PC. He didn't explain why. They were having some DVI issues, the long cables required were not reliable. I think DVI cables may have gotten better now.

~Jay

I haven't seen him use anything other than WMV9 HD files, in 720p, from a custom built PC, using the DVI input, in recent history.

Jay

He felt the Sigma MPEG decoder in the Bravo DVD player was better than the SW MPEG decoder used in the PC.

He really does not demo SD DVD anymore. He sticks with HD. He also only uses the DVI input for demos.

Thanks George and Stacy.................

Nice to see the "Big Guns" showing up.......

does the H710AE have air intakes on the Lt or Rt side or both and is the front exhaust vent the only exhaust vent?

I've never seen the H79 and the SP-H710AE side-by-side, with the same source. That would be the only way to draw a proper comparison. However, I did get to see the H79 at a trade show. The 710 seems to have more "depth" to the image and more accurate colors, while the H79 (as I remember) would have a slight edge in black levels. They are both excellent representatives of their TI chips. If price were no object, it would be a tough choice, but I'd still go with the Samsung. Factoring in price, it's Samsung all the way.

:D

Ahhh, things are heating up again... The H79 is now discontinued, and Optoma just started shipping the first of 2 replacement models (perhaps one is replacing the H78DC3 - which many, including myself, consider identical to the H79 except for warranty and method of distribution.

The HD7100 started shipping a couple of days ago. It's the new Darkchip3 projector, and has lens shift, etc.

Following shortly is the HD7300 which has outboard Gennum processing... (I'm not sure what processing is in the HD7100).

I'm expecting an HD7100 in for review in the next two weeks, and I'm going to contact Samsung tomorrow to see if I can get an H710 soon enough that they overlap in their time here. The starting MAP price for the Optoma with it's darkchip3 is only $3499, so it is the logical replacement for the H78DC3 - which was always the least expensive Darkchip3 projector.

Not having seen either, but reading H710 comments, it should be interesting to see if a top flite DC2 projector can equal or exceed a DC3 projector from a company with a good rep for their HT projectors.

One thing though, I certainly expect that the Optoma will need calibrating, to do good color, it's always been a weak spot of theirs, someone over in Taiwan seems to like green a little to much. -art

I also have the Motorola 6412 HD cable box (an early one with DVI), but it doesn't seem to be crushing blacks. In fact I have the brightness turned down to 48. I don't know about the Accurain, but my Samsung SIR-T165 definitely uses graphics levels.


Ken Whitcomb

The Moto 6412 puts out Studio levels (Black at 16 / White at 235) from its DVI output. Component is close to reference levels, though I don't remember exactly how close off the top of my head.

Glenn

thank you.

Jay

He felt the Sigma MPEG decoder in the Bravo DVD player was better than the SW MPEG decoder used in the PC.

He really does not demo SD DVD anymore. He sticks with HD. He also only uses the DVI input for demos.

Thanks for clarifying that.... I think i remember seeing you in Joe's booth at CES two years ago!

Do you think software decoders have gotten better in two years? I have come to enjoy MCE and MyMovies so much that I can live with any slight compromise. But with this new projector I think it might be good to have a reference DVD player just to compare.

~Jay

Sammy is in the house! Wow, what a difference. My 3 year old Sony HS10 has provided good (if somewhat washed out) entertainment, but this thing puts a spectacular picture on my 80" wide Firehawk (1.35 gain) screen. Out of the box colors, sharpness and shadow detail are really quite amazing for the price. I watched most of Fifth Element for the 93rd time and saw tons of detail never present, or at least noticeable before. I was considering a new Grayhawk screen due to discussion in this thread, but i see no pressing need for it now. I saw no evidence of hotspotting from any seat - if it crops up on future viewing, i'll just sit in the center seat and put less critical viewers in the outboard positions:-). Colors are so much more vivid than before that i can easily live with any inaccuracy caused by the Firehawk. The highest compliment to this PJ is that my wife noticed the difference immediately. She generally thinks i'm obsessed, but said she could see why i wanted this PJ (Strategic jewelry purchases have successfully defused grumbling about new AV equipment). It's like having a 92" plasma in the basement!

One small complaint is that even though fan noise is very low, there is a high picthed hum that is really annoying during quiet passages. It stopped when i turned off the PJ as soon as the bulb went off, while the fan was still running. Is that the color wheel? If yes, how do you oil that sucker????:-)

I'd like to offer a big thanks to Ken Whitcomb and David Abrams for their very helpful contributions to this thread and to Joe Kane for creating this PJ.

PS - If you get this PJ and ceiling mount from AVS, the mounting screws you will need to buy are M6 - 20mm socket head cap screws. These are metric machine screws with hex sockets in the top. The ones i bought at Lowes have the same hex key size as the ones that come with the PJ - i guess its a standard size. The ones in the mount package are 12mm long and won't reach the PJ threads, which are recessed.

jv

Hi Jon,

Could you tell me where you sit relative to where the projector is? I ask because I'll likely have to have a ceiling mounted projector that will be mounted in front of where I sit (i.e., between where I sit and the screen). I'm trying to guage if this is a good or bad arrangement, though room size and configuration likely means that it's an arrangement I'm stuck with.

ctviggen,

I sit directly underneath the PJ, with a second row of seating on an 8" riser behind. I have a 7' 8" ceiling in the basement theater. The only light spill from the PJ is on the front, so being behind it won't cause a problem from that perspective. It's physically much larger than my previous unit, so it's a little more visually intrusive but i didn't sit in the back row last night so i can't offer any observations about having it in the field of view right now.

jv

Anyone else notice the high pitched whine that Jon has on his unit?

Maybe alittle but its so much quieter than my CRT was Iam very happy with it.

Brad

have not noticed the whine noise ?
but will have to listen again tonight compared with the other projectors I had in here to test its so much more quiet I only hear it in dead quiet scenes when I listen for it

Just to clarify, there are 2 distinct noises coming from my projector, both of which are fairly quiet. The fan noise is low pitched and more or less soothing - like one of those things you put by the bed to help fall asleep. It's certainly quieter than my old PJ. The second, which stopped immediately when the bulb turned off, is much a higher pitched sound that is very irritating even at low volume. I'm just speculating about color wheel noise since this is my first DLP.

JV

Definitely sounds like the color wheel to me. The wheel is tied to the lamp, and is usually independent of the fan.

On the BenQ 7700, the projector's fan starts first, then the lamp and whine of the color wheel start several seconds later. The color wheel whines, while the fan simply sounds like the sound of rushing air. Just the opposite happens upon shut down.

Just got the go ahead from my wife to turn our family room downstairs into a dedicated home theater. The dimensions of the room are 13 x 25 with an 8' ceiling. I want to go with a 123 inch screen but am wondering if that may be too big for the samsung. I would appreciate any feedback. I am looking forward to joining the "home theater" club!

randyox sounds like a nice room ;)

I think the samy can do it but will be pushing it but can do it with a higher gain screen better than a lot of other PJs in that price range
but also what is your budget for everything and what do you have ?
also in figuring things out what is the main thing for you sound or picture ?
i think sound is very important so you could maybe get a nice clean sound setup for not as much and put more into the PJ ? and get one that is a bit more of a pj to throw a nice bright clean large pic

My budget is somewhat limited. I was originally thinking of going with the panny 900, but with all the reviews of the samsung, I really think this is the direction I want to go. I have a Yamaha 5990 A/V receiver and Klipsch speakers with monster cables connects. I just need the projector and the screen. I originally budgeted about 3k for both. I am trying to talk my better half into going an additional thousand. I am using Directv tivo for my main source of programming.

Randyox ;)

well I can say my other half is happy as long as I am ;) and I was going the route you are kinda
I started off with lower price LCD then moved up tried out 5 projectors total the last one I liked the most was the Mitsubishi HC3000 and then with all the talk of the Samsung I had to try it out
well with the lens shift and being able to mount it closer to my gear and not have to buy more cables etc... it was going to work out a touch more than a lower priced PJ with all the longer cables

got to say I was blown away with how good it is and how much nicer it is than the other ones that it is well worth the extra $$ and more important even my wife thought it was much nicer

I started off with lower price LCD then moved up tried out 5 projectors total the last one I liked the most was the Mitsubishi HC3000 and then with all the talk of the Samsung I had to try it out
well with the lens shift and being able to mount it closer to my gear and not have to buy more cables etc... it was going to work out a touch more than a lower priced PJ with all the longer cables

got to say I was blown away with how good it is and how much nicer it is than the other ones that it is well worth the extra $$ and more important even my wife thought it was much nicer

Honu, I saw your posts on HC3000U forum too -- can you give us some high level comparison between Mits 3K and H710AE ?

Thanks, Davie.

My budget is somewhat limited. I was originally thinking of going with the panny 900, but with all the reviews of the samsung, I really think this is the direction I want to go. I have a Yamaha 5990 A/V receiver and Klipsch speakers with monster cables connects. I just need the projector and the screen. I originally budgeted about 3k for both. I am trying to talk my better half into going an additional thousand. I am using Directv tivo for my main source of programming.

I think you may have over budgeted on the screen unless you are planning on getting a Stewart. You could easily get a Carada for around 1000 dollars which would free up a little extra for your PJ.

I think you may have over budgeted on the screen unless you are planning on getting a Stewart. You could easily get a Carada for around 1000 dollars which would free up a little extra for your PJ.

But I don't think carada has anything like the Firehawk, does it?

Davie not sure how to give them ? high end or to give high end thoughts but can try ;)
and sorry in adv for my poor grammar

as I have said in my other posts I found the sharp DT-400 and the Mits very close so close that both are great and say if you had both playing in a dif room that walking from one room to the other you would have to go back and forth a bit to see which one was better
with the Samsung you could walk in and hands down notice this projector is better by a good amount
I try not to use the word blow the other one away since the mits was so good but I can say that the samsung just looks so much more life like its amazing

one example is in Lost I am from Maui so used to seeing the foliage and stuff they shoot on the show
well when they were up looking for the balloon and walking in the one field when there are some gold colored grass that was freshly wet the mits or the sharp are almost dead even with a small lead going toward the mits the problem is it still looked like I was watching it on something ? a screen or a tv or a plasma some things just look like you are watching them do to the colors and the saturation either being over saturated or under
well with the Samsung it was like I was there and I swear I could almost smell the fresh rain smell on the grass it was that life like
the gold color on the samsung has a 3d look where you can see the wetter more gold blades vs the less wet and therefore not as saturated gold look
the other PJs would show it as less of a dif between the two and maybe not as wet looking ?
one of those things when you see something in real life you know what it should look like and to me the samsung delivers

maybe my best analogy would be the image almost looks Photoshoped but done in a way to make colors look proper not overdone maybe like the mits needs its histogram brought up on both ends buy a few points
I dont know if that makes sense or not ? but only way I can think to describe it

or another analogy might be going from a less projector like the Sony 51 or the panny 900 both lcd to the mits was like a think layer of saran wrap was lifted off the image well the samsung lifts another two layers of that saran wrap off giving that much cleaner looking image

this is also why I am afraid to go look at a 15k projector :) hehehehehe

as far as color and facial features etc.. again things are just so life like its amazing with skin tones appearing life like the color and contrast is very smooth without having to heavy of shadows showing up almost like there is a fill light on faces vs not having that fill
things like hair just having a nicer looking more natural and wider looking color palette and sheen to it.

another analogy my wife has when she first saw the sammy pic watching lost ;) she said it was like being on the beach and then putting on polarized glasses and realizing just how much glare there really is and how much the colors then pop off the beach and the water and just come to life with polarized glasses !
that might be the best analogy yet ;)


one other analogy might be is if you had the mits running in a dark room and had a 20-30 watt bulb on say in the back of the room and then turn that bulb off how the pic tends to then look better more saturated etc.. well that is kinda a way of looking at how the sammy is nicer its that kinda saran wrap lifted look that you can notice only once its lifted

and as I have said the Mits is a great projector and can make someone happy without any problem until you viewed the sammy then you would want the sammy but it is more $$ and like anything I think there is a price point when you start to hit a wall of performance
there was this wall at the mits and the sharp point they were both so close I thought I was not going to get over that wall so I went out to some local HT places here and one had a ruby there and a yamaha playing that incredibles loop well the ruby was nicer and smoother than the yamaha but when I got home and put on that same part I thought the ruby was nicer than the Mits or the sharp but not as nice as my sammy ?
now that store might not have the ruby setup properly ? and going from my memory I might be thinking wrong ? or not ? but to me the sammy put me in a whole new area of performance I thought I was not going to get into so I can see why the earlier version was in that 10K range
and this also goes to my thoughts of comparing projectors by walking from one room to another could you tell the dif hands down ?
and to the Ruby point I am not saying It is as nice ? since I dont have a ruby to compare with but I can say that before the other ones were noticeably not as nice but now I think the sammy is in the same class or close enough when comparing color etc...
so again dont want this to get into a I am comparing it to a ruby post ;) I am not just using it as a example
I also have plans in 3 years to replace it with whatever is the cool thing then 1080P or ?? and chances are then will up my budget to a bit more

as you can tell I am very very very happy with the projector
I use a Denon 2900 and ordered in a 2910 to compare it to over DVI for fun
my receiver is a NAD T 773 with PSB speakers all around
I always think this kinda info helps me understand where others are coming from ;)

Honu.


I really must agree with you about the great picture quality. You pointed out that
faces looked as tho a "fill light" was bringing out the detail in shadows. I feel the same. In fact its the handling or balance of the light that seems to give me that "you are there" 3d look. I work with 3d software to generate photo real images of products that do not exist yet (prototypes). The bigest battle is Globel Illumination, that is to make the image appear as if it was lit by real lights in a real world. Very small changes to the lighting can make or break the illusion. When we watch a recording of the real world the (light) is what it is and should look natural or real, but for me much of the time this just is not the case. With good input material the h710 does a good job at filling in all those little light details, that in turn give me the feeling I am looking into real space. This, along with the great color and sharpness make watching a lot of fun.

As you can tell I am very very very happy with the projector
I use a Denon 2900 and ordered in a 2910 to compare it to over DVI for fun
my receiver is a NAD T 773 with PSB speakers all around
I always think this kinda info helps me understand where others are coming from ;)

Honu, big thanks to you for this wonderful review -- your personal touch made me (and I hope others) understand what this PJ is all about, something that lumens and contrast numbers just can't describe -- I am very happy that you found your dream projector :) -- Enjoy it !!

This certainly put 710AE as Nr 1 on my list ;) .

BTW, what kind of screen do you have / what size ?

Thanks again, Davie.

at this time I have a 92diag white optoma screen
I have 2x2 foot samples of the HCMW and the HP
I am leaning toward the HCMW screen in a size of 106-110 diag
since from the large sample it provides a nice dark level and nice color for my room which is not a dedicated HT room but our main fun room of the house

I will get a grayhawk RS in the next year when the fun money account comes back up ;)


glad my rambling made sense and helped out ;)

I just got my 77" Saaria gray magic perm screen yesterday. Man this thing looks sweet. Yes I know it is going smaller, but I now have deep inky blacks. I also can have quite a bit of ambient light now without degrading picture too much. It is also still plenty bright to boot. It never shifted the colors at all either. The other half requested to be able to have some lights on and this was my best option for the price. :rolleyes: One great thing about the gray magic it hides any artifacts that I was seeing. :D

I my opinion one should go no larger then a 92" screen if going for a gray screen.
As the lamp ages it be plenty bright and you should be able to run it in economy mode most of the life of the lamp. You can always tame the brightness down with a ND filter when new. It's better than having to buy a lamp or screen to get the brightness back. My Optoma lamp nightmares have taught me a good lesson in having to big of screen. Yes they look great at first but once the lamp start to settle there go the punchy pic with it.

Dale

I think that's good gray screen advice, azjetski. In the quest for better blacks people often forget how much light is lost when the bulb ages. 92" is a good cut-off. Maybe even smaller depending on the projector.

Honu, thanks for all the input. I went home and shared your thoughts with my wife. She was impressed with what you had to say and was also relieved to hear about your wife's reaction to the projector. I'm looking forward to making the jump from our sony 61" big screen to the samsung projector. One more question for you. You mentioned upgrading to the firehawk screen...how big are you going...and why? Thanks again for all your help!

Honu--great review. As someone who also enjoys photography (albeit at a more amateur level) that perspective is really useful. I'm now even more enthusiastic about this purchase, but can't stand the wait until the theater is done.

Since others are talking screens, now, I wanted to note that the Carada brilliant white seems like a good bargain match for those (like me) who don't want to extend their screen budget into the Stewart range. Since it's been favorably compared to the Studiotek, I'm hoping it proves to be a good lower-priced alternative.

KK

Honu, thanks for all the input. I went home and shared your thoughts with my wife. She was impressed with what you had to say and was also relieved to hear about your wife's reaction to the projector. I'm looking forward to making the jump from our sony 61" big screen to the samsung projector. One more question for you. You mentioned upgrading to the firehawk screen...how big are you going...and why? Thanks again for all your help!

Please post how you like the switch from the 61" rptv to the Sammy pj. This is the choice I'm considering (but from a 73" Mits dlp rptv). Will be interested to see if you are satisfied with the change.

Randyox I think I will end up with a 106 screen
mainly do to the room layout and the distance the projector is on the stand the room is about 18 feet long wise
the pj on one end and the screen on the other since the room serves dual use and I did not want to ceiling mount (fan in the way) I will have the pj on a shelf at one end the screen will have to be a pull down as it will hang in front of doors that go outside so with the pj being 15.6 feet to the screen I am going to need a 106 at least the 92 I use now the stand the pj sits on is pulled out into the room a bit to much I had also thought I might be able to just mount the screen out a touch more or closer toward us and get away with a smaller one ? which is something I still might think of

also at first I thought I was wanting it to be 123 inches or so I think falling into the bigger is better but I quickly found within the first few days that quality over quantity is what I want

how we came about the 110 inch size my wife and I shot it up on the wall and watched some scenes to see how much our heads/eyes were moving to watch while sitting at 14 feet and we found we liked 110 inches was very immersive to us without being to much head eye movement so we figure 106 or 110 will be nice
also while playing with the pj blowing up the image over 123 the light fall off was enough that I did not like it as much

one other thought I have to get grayhawk samples (I have firehawk samples) but the HCMW as I mentioned does a nice job with darks and contrast etc.. and is in budget at first

hope that answers it ;)

Honu, thanks for the info. I certainly understand your feelings about quality over quantity. I like your idea of you and your wife watching the projected image with various screen sizes. That's what we will have to do. My wife just mentioned that she wants to get one of those big "love sacs" to put in the home theater room in front of the seats. If we do that I'm afraid that a 123" screen will be too big to enjoy. (We have grand kids...she thinks the grandkids will love to lay out on the love sac to watch movies with us).

Are you using a digital satellite receiver for your signal for tv. We have a directv with tivo. If so, how does the picture look? I've read on some of the other posts that some of the projectors produce less than flattering video when hooked up with a tv tuner.

Again, thanks for all your help. We really do appreciate it.

I am also looking at the Carada BW at 110" with the Sammy. I think it will create a very plasma-like image for the first several hundred hours, then drift to a very "normal" presentation as the bulb burns down.

I am totally stoked to get this projector! Now I just have to find the new house!!

our little one almost 23 months loves to watch movies really big ;)
its fun as she goes up to the screen and the backyardigans are her size ;) hehehehe

I want to get one of those huge love sacs or big old bags ;)

even at 14 feet watching shows on the 92 is nice and I am getting more used to it but a bit larger will be nice

I have digital cable and mostly watch primetime type shows that are in HD
only a few normal shows and they are not that bad really and again I think the 710 does a better job with regular signals than the others so they are still worth watching on the screen
my wife likes the desperate housewives and I guess I have to say its kinda fun to watch ;) but last night it kept popping in and out of HD ? so gave us a good example going back and forth and HD is just so much nicer
smoother cleaner sharper etc....
some channels I watch such as History channel or the Military channel are only in SD so I have no choice

I can say for some reason watching SD on a plasma is not so nice while watching SD on the projectors is not as bad ? not sure why that is ? my mind thinks the PJ should be worse since its larger but maybe the size smoothes it out more and tricks the eye ??

Honu, again thanks for answering all of our questions. I justed called Samsung to see if there was a dealer in our area. There isn't anything anywhere near where I live. My question is...did you see the projector before you bought it or did you buy it sight unseen? Do you know of any dealers out west that carry the projector where a person can go and see it first hand? I was hoping that there was a dealer in Vegas or even Denver, but nothing. Also...do you know where I can find the manual for the projector anywhere online?

randyvox,

I am a Denver dealer for this projector but do not have one installed in my demo theater for you to view. Here is the link for the manual download:

http://www.samsung.com/support/productsupport/download/Model_Select.aspx?type=Monitor&typecode=2&subtype=Projector&cmssubtypecode=206&model=SP-H710AE&filetype=UM

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
www.cinemaquestinc.com

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Thanks GeorgeAB!

Honu, you're selling a lot of these with your reviews! I love your analogies of how the picture looks. I've pretty much settled on the 710 when I can make my purchase in a few weeks.

Thanks!
George

glad GeorgeAB got ya the manual link :)

I bought it without seeing it from AVS
after viewing a few projectors in my place (total of 5) and looking at dealers as much as I could etc...
the fact of what this pj was last year and the few people that spoke about it seemed to speak highly of the color and better to say proper color it made me decide to go out on a limb and try it sight unseen but since I had the DT-400 still here to compare I figured I was safe and I would know in the first hour or so and worse case scenario keep it or return it based on the pic out of the box

its kinda a hassle to buy sight unseen but I guess you have to buy something at some point and really seems like every pj acts and looks a touch dif once in your house much like previewing speakers etc...

GeoCab glad my ramblings help out ;) hehehehe
I suck at writing but try to get my thoughts out

Honu

I have the Stewart Grayhawk RS its 83.75"wide which is 96" diagonal. When Ken calibrated mine in theater mode on the lamp we got right at 12fL. So going back to what Ken Whitcomb and David Abrams are saying about screen sizes hold true with the Grayhawk RS. With a white screen or at least the Studiotek with a 1.3 gain a 120"wide is the max size. You know if you go with 110" for now, you wont want to go smaller later :D

Brad

Brad thanks for the info
yeah I can believe its harder to go down in size later ;) hehehehe

have to look at my room again and see how forward I can mount the PJ and where it will fit if I set it for the 96 diag screen ?


I really think of quality over quantity so if I have to go 96 with a grayhawk then thats the way it is ;) I would rather sit a touch closer to a touch smaller brighter screen then farther away from a duller one ;)

so thanks again and the fact you had it calibrated by Ken I know from reading he seems to be a great guy with great advice


still might try a 106 or 110 HCMW to hold me over then
or paint my room as dark as I can get away with and go for the 1.3 gain ;)

Honu

I have mine ceiling mounted 14ft from the screen. Yes Ken is great and really know his stuff. My room is total light control with black carpet, front wall and dark almost black ceiling and walls. I went with the Grayhawk RS based off of see the 710AE on my Studiotek (I just need a little more blacks) and of course Ken told me to get the Grayhawk and that was all I need to here. Its a perfect match.

Brad

Hey everyone, I just sold my panny AE700 and pulled the trigger on the AVS power buy last week for the IN76. That has become one huge chaotic mess now with Infocus so I started looking around for other projectors while I wait it all out.

This projector looks much more promising based on all I've read (and I just read the entire thread and a few reviews). I'm still learning so I have a few questions.

I just bought an Onkyo SR803 receiver with HDMI. Can I output HDMI from a panny s97 DVD player to the Onkyo and then use a HDMI to DVI cable without any consequences?

Also - I plan on upgrading to HD DVD or BluRay eventually. Is it set in stone now that this DVI with HDCP will work or are they still tinkering with standards?

My last concern has to do with lumens. The IN76 is rated at 1000 and this is rated at 700. Based on what I've read - both numbers are exaggerated. Are their actual lumen outputs similar? I like my movies filmlike but I like games to look bright and vibrant. I want a projector that can handle both well.

This is slightly more than I wanted to spend - Over $1k more when you compare it to the IN76 power buy. The lens shift in itself is worth quite a bit to me (I have low ceilings in the basement and like my screen where it is). I saw that Sony LCOS TV in circuit city the other day and was blown away by the image - Can I expect to feel the same with this?

Thank you all for any comments, help, or advice you might have.

From most of the reviews I have read, this PJ puts out the same or more light than most PJ's rated at 1000 lumens...

Here's a quote from the projectorcentral review of the 710

"The projector is designed to be used in a darkened theater space with moderately large screen sizes. It carries a theoretical 700 ANSI lumens rating, and in bright mode we measured an actual light output of 580 ANSI lumens. Switching to "theater" mode netted a respectable 465 ANSI lumens. So the H710's actual lumen output is much closer to its theoretical maximum than is the case for most competing home theater projectors. In reality, the H710 puts out more light than many models rated at 1000 lumens or more. So buyers should not try to compare the H710 to other models based on the official specifications.

The H710 has enough lumen power to light up a 120" diagonal 16:9 screen, and even larger if you desire a very big image. However, this unit is built to deliver maximum image quality, and image quality always degrades degrades on any projector as you increase the size of the image. For our taste, in order to obtain the best results, we would prefer to use the H710 with a screen size in the 100" to 120" range. "

Here's a link to the review:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/samsung_sph710.htm

Honu

I have mine ceiling mounted 14ft from the screen. Yes Ken is great and really know his stuff. My room is total light control with black carpet, front wall and dark almost black ceiling and walls. I went with the Grayhawk RS based off of see the 710AE on my Studiotek (I just need a little more blacks) and of course Ken told me to get the Grayhawk and that was all I need to here. Its a perfect match.

Brad
my brothers name is Brad :)
so one of those funny things when I see it elsewhere ;)

ahhh so you had a studiotek and got the grayhawk even with a dark room even over the white ;) hmmmmmm interesting and great info

I think I might have to do 100 diag the closest I can get it is 15 feet and that is what the projector says it will be ?
I might be able to get a few inches in on 15 but not much otherwise my screen will be infront of the speakers to much I think
so when I go to get one the debate will be 100 or 96 ;) heheheh
my prob is I have bought way to many toys this year and no toy budget left for the grayhawk :)

Hey everyone, I just sold my panny AE700 and pulled the trigger on the AVS power buy last week for the IN76. That has become one huge chaotic mess now with Infocus so I started looking around for other projectors while I wait it all out.

This projector looks much more promising based on all I've read (and I just read the entire thread and a few reviews). I'm still learning so I have a few questions.

I just bought an Onkyo SR803 receiver with HDMI. Can I output HDMI from a panny s97 DVD player to the Onkyo and then use a HDMI to DVI cable without any consequences?

Also - I plan on upgrading to HD DVD or BluRay eventually. Is it set in stone now that this DVI with HDCP will work or are they still tinkering with standards?

My last concern has to do with lumens. The IN76 is rated at 1000 and this is rated at 700. Based on what I've read - both numbers are exaggerated. Are their actual lumen outputs similar? I like my movies filmlike but I like games to look bright and vibrant. I want a projector that can handle both well.

This is slightly more than I wanted to spend - Over $1k more when you compare it to the IN76 power buy. The lens shift in itself is worth quite a bit to me (I have low ceilings in the basement and like my screen where it is). I saw that Sony LCOS TV in circuit city the other day and was blown away by the image - Can I expect to feel the same with this?

Thank you all for any comments, help, or advice you might have.

I currently am using a 77" gray screen and my opinion it looks a lot better than the Sony SXRD line of RPTVs out now. It's kind of funny my son has been raving about a Qualia 6 for about a year now and is saving up for one. He is a Sony fanatic, and everything he buys is Sony. When he seen my current 710 setup he loved it. Even admitted that it was better then the Sony SXRD line. Now I know that has to be a hard thing for him to swallow. :D We are always in competition with each other, but I usually am one step ahead. :D It also drives my wife nuts. :)

Dale

Hey everyone, I just sold my panny AE700 and pulled the trigger on the AVS power buy last week for the IN76. That has become one huge chaotic mess now with Infocus so I started looking around for other projectors while I wait it all out.

bummer to hear the probs not fun I am sure



This projector looks much more promising based on all I've read (and I just read the entire thread and a few reviews). I'm still learning so I have a few questions.

I just bought an Onkyo SR803 receiver with HDMI. Can I output HDMI from a panny s97 DVD player to the Onkyo and then use a HDMI to DVI cable without any consequences?

cant see why this would be any prob at all I am doing this out of my cable box



Also - I plan on upgrading to HD DVD or BluRay eventually. Is it set in stone now that this DVI with HDCP will work or are they still tinkering with standards?

shouldn't be a prob to many dvi out there so dont worry ;)



My last concern has to do with lumens. The IN76 is rated at 1000 and this is rated at 700. Based on what I've read - both numbers are exaggerated. Are their actual lumen outputs similar? I like my movies filmlike but I like games to look bright and vibrant. I want a projector that can handle both well.

my thoughts are the IN76 is going after more the Mitsubishi HC3000 than this Samsung and reading reports etc.. kinda makes me pretty positive about that
and having had the Mits I can tell you the Samsung will be way way better than the Mits for sure and since it is in comp with the Mits I think you will be amazed at how much nicer things will be on the samsung if you get it
movies look incredible and my PS2 looks killer for sure :) cant wait to get a Xbox360 and PS3 :) toys I love toys
spec wise lets try this I am into cars ;)
while the BMW 325 and a M3 have somewhat the same specs in some sense a few numbers are dif but numbers can make them look close I would much rather have the M3 :)
both are great cars though so either one is cool with me
and the Mits numbers are a touch better but its how the PJ was made that you will love at almost 20lbs this thing feels like a nice component and will make you grin from ear to ear when you light it up



This is slightly more than I wanted to spend - Over $1k more when you compare it to the IN76 power buy. The lens shift in itself is worth quite a bit to me (I have low ceilings in the basement and like my screen where it is). I saw that Sony LCOS TV in circuit city the other day and was blown away by the image - Can I expect to feel the same with this?

Thank you all for any comments, help, or advice you might have.
I am coming to PJ from plasmas
decided since I moved to the mainland recently we have the room now to go big and I looked at the large RP type tvs including the mits and the sony and they are nice and if I wanted to view in the bright day I would want one
but once its dark this projector rips ;) thats all I can say I am so happy and going over 90 inches diag is so so cool
my wife cant watch me play games though ?? she says the motion is to much hehehhehee

and at least for me now seeing how nice the pic is over the mits and my sharp I would pay retail for it and still think I got a deal ;) did you price it through AVS ? they were great to deal with and highly recommend ;)

Thank you all for your comments and help.

When I was reading up on the IN76 I learned that they engineered it to be fairly maintenance free.

What sort of maintenance would this projector require?
Also, will I have to worry about dust blobs or does this have closed optics (and does having that even fully prevent them)?

Honu you should run out and get yourself a 360. Man it is awsome, razor sharp on the 710. Using it for DVDs is very good also, but my pano S97 is better. They are going to come out with a HDDVD player that will hook into one of the USB ports. Then things will really be good. :D

Dale

Dale

I can confirm the 360 is awsome In one month between HD and 360 I have 150hrs :D on my 710AE. I cant wait for Blueray and HD-DVD add on for the 360.

Brad

So does anyone know how this projector would work with a perforated screen? We originally wanted to go this directions and put the speakers behind the screen. Anybody have any experience with this? I understand screen research has the best perforated screen...and recommended by some big names in the A/V world. Any info would be appreciated.

I'm also interested in the perforated screen question, as I wouldn't mind putting my center channel behind the screen.

I have to get more toy money first ;) hehehhehe I want one though very badly

Honu, with all the good press you have given this projector, you ought to have Samsung put up the money for your screen! :D

heheheheh I would accept if they did ;)

I just ordered Sandman's acoustically transparent screen material to try with the Sammy. I expect to get it next week. See his thread in the DIY screen forum for extensive info. I'd like to get my speakers off the floor and into the wall since the room isn't large and i would much rather have voices coming from the screen than from a box below. I don't know if i will actually build an AT screen, it depends on how much of a PQ compromise is involved. I will probably just hang it over my Firehawk and see what it looks like before building anything. I chose to go this way because the cost to try it is very low (about $125) compared to Stewart or Screen Research multi $000s.

ctviggen - i sat in the back row last night, about 4 feet behind the PJ. My eyeballs were 44" below the ceiling and the bottom of the PJ is 16" below the ceiling. I wasn't bothered by having the PJ in my field of view. It may not be ideal but if you have little placement latitude, i wouldn't worry too much about being able to see the projector. I would think many HTs with multi-row seating face the same issue.
JV

Just got this pj and am amzed with the pq and colors straight out of the box. Currently flashing it on a wall and researching screens. Based on some of the comments posted on this thread, I was thinking of going with the grewhawk (HT room has light walls with some potential light seepage). I was talking to a couple of Stewart dealers and surprisingly both of them strongly recommended the Firehawk over the Greyhawk. Was wondering if anybody could share thoughts on this. Does the firehawk really do better with ambient lighting and provide additional gain (~30%) over the Greyhawk. Would really appreciate some feedback here as I am almost ready to order mine.

Ralph if you havent read all the thread I would do so since the screen choices have come up a few times ;)

my thought if you have the budget for the screen is to get the grayhawk RS since it will go hand in hand with this PJ

scroll up a bit BradH has the grayhawk so he might be a good one to ask a couple questions to
also others including the designer of the projector seem to recommend the grayhawkRS or the studiotek as the two main choices

ralph_kool,

I was thinking of going with the grewhawk (HT room has light walls with some potential light seepage). I was talking to a couple of Stewart dealers and surprisingly both of them strongly recommended the Firehawk over the Greyhawk. Was wondering if anybody could share thoughts on this. Does the firehawk really do better with ambient lighting and provide additional gain (~30%) over the Greyhawk. Would really appreciate some feedback here as I am almost ready to order mine.

It sounds like your viewing environment is seriously flawed to be doing front projection, at least during daylight hours. You will find that dark scenes in movies will not be able to include convincing blacks, with light walls and ceiling in the room. All those light surfaces act like mirrors and reflect light coming from any light source, even from the projected image itself, right back onto the screen. This effect will also serve to desaturate colors and lower your overall contrast ratio. The FireHawk will not be quite as accurate for color and white field uniformity as the GrayHawk RS, but will do a much better job of rejecting light reflected by the side walls and ceiling. Just be aware that screen brightness will be diminished for anyone who must view the screen from very far off-axis. Also be aware that any light or wall reflections coming from in front of the screen (back of the room) will not be rejected. That light will have gain, just as the projected image has gain.

You can't fool Mother Nature. In other words, every time you compromise on ideal imaging science principles, there will be a price to pay somewhere along the line. Usually that price is diminished image fidelity and lowered picture quality. The viewing environment is an absolutely critical component of every imaging system. Poor viewing environment conditions result in poor imaging.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

JV,

Thanks for the info. I'll be interested to hear how the screen turns out. One problem with my situation is that I have a beam that comes into the room in about one-1.5 feet. So, the projector would have to be mounted beneath that.

Ralph

George is right about have good light control for front pj. Dark wall, floor and ceiling all so make a big difference. The Grayhawk RS is really a light grey. Look here post #293 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=649376&page=10&pp=30

Here is how room looked before http://gallery.avsforum.com/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/39383

I will take some pictures tonight and it will show just how much painting the walls and ceiling dark makes a difference.

Joe Kane recommends the Grayhawk RS or the Sudiotek 130 for this projector to get the very best out of it. So I would say with you not having light control is why the Firehawk was recommended. Back a few pages George talks about why he recommends screen surfaces based on the room the projectors will be in.

I'm a Stewart dealer, have attended their product trainings in the past, but I have no recollection of the statements that you are remembering. Their web site's product descriptions make no such claim for the current FireHawk G2 that I could find. Someone may have voiced such a claim, but I haven't found any official statement that resembles, 'absolutely no spectral shift.' I would be happy to acknowledge such a statement if you can document it for me.



I've typically found that JKP's recommendations are practically focused and precisely defined. If that's what you mean by conservative, I fully agree. Precision is essential when working in the field of imaging science and display standards. When I advise my clients on display system design compromises, it's essential to understand the benefit or consequence factors behind every desision.

After all the various elements in the system are evaluated and prioritized, the rubber hits the road when the lights go out and an image is viewed for hours on end by the person who paid for it all. It's that image that has to be ultimately satisfying and should fulfill the program producer's intent as much as possible. Professionally, my duty to the customer is to listen to what they think they want but also recommend what I know to be technically correct for their specific application. The art of custom system design is in balancing personal taste with technical performance.

Display viewing environment issues are a sticky wicket for most home theater designers and sales people. Many professionals lack a sufficient grasp of how room conditions and human perceptual factors impact system performance. To expect customers to voice their design preferences based upon any understanding of these issues is usually folly. When potential customers have asked me what projector or screen I recommend for a home theater, I've told them flatly, "I don't." Until I know a lot more about them, their room, and their budget I would only be wasting my time to recommend anything. The FireHawk is a great screen, but it is designed for specific applications, with unique performance characteristics that must be understood for it to fit in a system correctly.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Brad

Ahhh, things are heating up again... The H79 is now discontinued, and Optoma just started shipping the first of 2 replacement models (perhaps one is replacing the H78DC3 - which many, including myself, consider identical to the H79 except for warranty and method of distribution.

The HD7100 started shipping a couple of days ago. It's the new Darkchip3 projector, and has lens shift, etc.

Following shortly is the HD7300 which has outboard Gennum processing... (I'm not sure what processing is in the HD7100).

I'm expecting an HD7100 in for review in the next two weeks, and I'm going to contact Samsung tomorrow to see if I can get an H710 soon enough that they overlap in their time here. The starting MAP price for the Optoma with it's darkchip3 is only $3499, so it is the logical replacement for the H78DC3 - which was always the least expensive Darkchip3 projector.

Not having seen either, but reading H710 comments, it should be interesting to see if a top flite DC2 projector can equal or exceed a DC3 projector from a company with a good rep for their HT projectors.

One thing though, I certainly expect that the Optoma will need calibrating, to do good color, it's always been a weak spot of theirs, someone over in Taiwan seems to like green a little to much. -art

Presenter, to the best of my understanding the HD7300 will be an HD7100 married to the HD3000 outboard processor...the HD7100 uses Pixelworks for de-interlacing and scaling. That gets bypassed once you've hooked up the HD3000 Gennum box. I would imagine a retrofit once the HD3000s are available would be straightforward.

Thank you all for your comments and help.

When I was reading up on the IN76 I learned that they engineered it to be fairly maintenance free.

What sort of maintenance would this projector require?
Also, will I have to worry about dust blobs or does this have closed optics (and does having that even fully prevent them)?

Mbot75, the H710AE is designed to keep dust from interfering with image quality. Samsung won't say it's got a "sealed" light engine, but they do say that the optics have been designed to accomplish that objective.

Here are the pictures with the darker paint. You can also see how light grey the Grayhawk RS is. Thats why light control is needed as well with this screen.

Brad

Nice room, Brad! How about a shot with the H710 on?

Would be nice to put the components in a rack off to the back side and use an IR distribution system. Then you could install a (black) shelf that would hold the center channel a few inches closer to the screen. Just nitpicking, though.

I'm considering upgrading to the SPH710 from my BenQ 8700. I have a 106" diagonal original Grayhawk screen (not RS - it's 0.85 gain) that I purchased when I owned a Sony 10HT. Would I get acceptable performance with the Samsung on this screen material? Changing the fabric would be difficult and expensive as it's an electric drop screen. Thanks for any advice!

Tom

gnomey

Thanks I will get a few pictures with it on. The rack is built in so all I have to do is go around back and pull of the panels to have access to the equipment. I do have all the lights off so I get no light from any components (well except the xbox 360 when its on). I have thought about moving every thing to the back but thinking about it and doing it are to different things :D . The room is 21.6"long and 13.4 wide so I would have enough room in the back for all the components if I every stop thinking about it and just do it :) .

Brad

Tom

Mine is 96 diagonal and with the lamp in theater mode (low) Iam getting right at 12fL. Maybe Ken Whitcomb can give some insight on your screen and the projector in High mode.

Brad

And the image is superb! I've run about 10 hours through it so far, and it beats the pants off the AE900. The Samsung handily dispatches the IN76 as well (Jason was right!). A friend just got the IN76. We have the same screen, the 123" Firehawk G2, and the Samsung yielded a much more detailed, film-like picture. HDTV content was about even. I had originally gone for the IN76 but the lack of lens shift killed it for me. Jason recommended the Samsung, it had lens shift, it was a rather uninformed purchase that luckily paid off!

One question: how would I go about measuring the actual lumens output? I have a light meter so I can measure lux, fC--what's the proper prototcol to getting an accurate reading? I would like to find out exactly what fL I am getting with the projector.

Using Jason's numbers,

Theater: fL=612 lumens * 1.25 gain / 45ft2 = 17 fL
Bright: fL=808 lumens * 1.25 gain / 45ft2 = 22 fL

The image looks great to my eye in either mode. If the above fL is accurate, which would be closer to say, a movie theater? (My theater is not hermetically light-sealed, but with the house lights off, it is near-pitch black.

For those on the fence with this projector, and especially those contemplating the IN76 vs H710AE, I enthusiastically recommend the Samsung.

Originally Posted by fugueness

The Samsung handily dispatches the IN76 as well (Jason was right!). A friend just got the IN76. We have the same screen, the 123" Firehawk G2, and the Samsung yielded a much more detailed, film-like picture. HDTV content was about even.

Hi Fugueness,

Are you saying the Sammy is quite a bit better than the IN76 on DVD, but on HDTV there is very little difference? If it is more 3D and filmlike I would think that would extend to HDTV as well. Just curious as most of my viewing is HDTV.

Thanks

Tom

Mine is 96 diagonal and with the lamp in theater mode (low) Iam getting right at 12fL. Maybe Ken Whitcomb can give some insight on your screen and the projector in High mode.

Brad

Thanks Brad. In theater mode it sounds like I'd be quite a bit below 12fL with my 106" diagonal and lower gain (0.85) original Grayhawk screen. Is the projector a lot louder in the high light output mode?

I've kind of resigned myself for a while now to only being able to use bright projectors or needing to change the screen material to Firehawk G2 or Studiotek 130. However, I shudder to think about taking the (heavy!) screen down, shipping to Stewart, and remounting. Plus, I got a quote from Stewart for rescreening at about $1.5K. Oh well, the original Grayhawk material worked great when I bought it 5 years ago for improving blacks on my Sony 10HT LCD projector. It's more of a liability now with the current medium output DLP projectors I've been using. I should probably bite the bullet and upgrade the screen now rather than my projector. With a higher gain screen the BenQ 8700 could probably tide me over for 1-2 more years until the 1080p DLP's fall below $7K.

Tom

Tom

Are you saying the Sammy is quite a bit better than the IN76 on DVD, but on HDTV there is very little difference? If it is more 3D and filmlike I would think that would extend to HDTV as well. Just curious as most of my viewing is HDTV.Thanks

With the lights out, the Samsung does yield a much better image, better color, more depth and detail. With the house lights on, it becomes much more about brightness, and these projectors are practically neck-neck in lumens output in both modes. Most of my viewing is DVD, but if it were HD, it would be a tough call since I like to watch TV with the lights on.

Thanks Brad. In theater mode it sounds like I'd be quite a bit below 12fL with my 106" diagonal and lower gain (0.85) original Grayhawk screen. Is the projector a lot louder in the high light output mode?

The Samsung in high light output mode is quieter than the Infocus in low mode. It is relatively quiet.

My calculations
Samsung Theater mode: 612 lumens * 0.85 gain / 33.33 ft2 = 15.6 fL
Samsung Bright mode: 808 lumens * 0.85 gain / 33.33 ft2 = 20.6 fL

Looks like you'd be fine!

Here are two screen shots from Shark Tale off the DVR. I will need to try more settings with camera. Most of the one I took were to dark. I will work with some other settings after the battery charges :) . Maybe Jason can tell me how he has his camera setup. The second one was so dark I had to use auto level in picture it 7.

Brad

Thanks fugueness,

Makes sense that with the lights on much of the Sammy's advantage is lost. Not an issue for me becuase I have totaly ambient light control, and pretty good reflected light control. I do have gold/tan colored walls but they are non-reflective becuase there is sand in the paint. Flat white stucco ceiling will reflect some light but I will cover with black sheet during viewing.

Tom Blake,

I shudder to think about taking the (heavy!) screen down, shipping to Stewart, and remounting. Plus, I got a quote from Stewart for rescreening at about $1.5K.

I find it difficult to believe you can't just order the new screen fabric, take the frame down, detach the old material, then re-attach the new material. No rigid frame screen I have ever mounted has ever been what I would call heavy. Do you you have an electric mask frame? It's also difficult for me to believe just the fabric would be $1.5k. Can you elaborate more on your situation? Maybe you could just call me to discuss this further. I'm a Stewart dealer. Send me a PM with your phone number and I'll call you instead.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Tom Blake,



I find it difficult to believe you can't just order the new screen fabric, take the frame down, detach the old material, then re-attach the new material. No rigid frame screen I have ever mounted has ever been what I would call heavy. Do you you have an electric mask frame? It's also difficult for me to believe just the fabric would be $1.5k. Can you elaborate more on your situation? Maybe you could just call me to discuss this further. I'm a Stewart dealer. Send me a PM with your phone number and I'll call you instead.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

George - It's a Luxus Model A Electriscreen. Stewart told me a while ago it had to be sent in to swap fabrics and I recall the quote being about $1.5K for labor/materials. Probably another $250 for round trip freight also. I'd be willing to do it if it weren't such a pain in the arse to take down and put back up! I'll contact you via PM.

Thanks,

Tom

fugueness - thanks for the calcs. That's encouraging!

D6500Ken - if you had time to offer any comments on how you think the 710 would be on my original 0.85 gain Grayhawk in high bright mode I'd greatly appreciate it!

Tom

You will find that dark scenes in movies will not be able to include convincing blacks, with light walls and ceiling in the room. All those light surfaces act like mirrors and reflect light coming from any light source, even from the projected image itself, right back onto the screen...Also be aware that any light or wall reflections coming from in front of the screen (back of the room) will not be rejected. That light will have gain, just as the projected image has gain.

You can't fool Mother Nature...The viewing environment is an absolutely critical component of every imaging system. Poor viewing environment conditions result in poor imaging.

G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

GeorgeAB,

So how dark is dark enough? We're building a room that, while designed as a theater and primarily fulfilling that purpose, will also serve as a place where our kids may hang out with the lights on. A "bat cave" atmosphere just isn't going to work for us. We're contemplating going with midnight blue for the ceiling and screen wall, and a medium blue elsewhere. What do you think of that kind of environment with this projector and a Carada BW (1.3 gain) screen? Is that a reasonable compromise between form and function?

KK

A flat black ceiling is the best. That is the room surface closest to the screen and the most likely to wash out or tint the screen. Just painting the section closest to the screen can suffice. My demo theater has the first half of the ceiling black and the farthest half is white. It works very well, although all the other walls are dark wood paneling.

The walls and carpet can be lighter if desired. Munsell nearly neutrals are subdued shades of just about any color. They are like pastels with a slight gray base. Munsell nearly neutrals are recommended by SMPTE for use in professional video viewing environments.

One of Joe Kane's demo rooms at CEDIA EXPO one year had a white ceiling. I could see a shadow at the top of the screen on both the GrayHawk and StudioTech 130. The shadow was visible on all program material, less so on dark scenes. It looked like a darker stripe that was about 2 or 3 inches along the entire width of the top of the image. What this shadow indicated was that the entire screen area except the top few inches was being illuminated by the reflection from the ceiling. A white ceiling would simple wash out the image somewhat. A colored ceiling would tint the image slightly.

A current client's dedicated theater will be used by his grandkids at times, like you suggest. He has can lights in the ceiling, a black ceiling and medium gray walls. He has opted for black fabric wrapped acoustic panels placed strategically around the room. The carpet is light gray with black speckles. It just so happens he is getting the Samsung projector as well. There will be enough illumination for his grandkids to move around and play video games, etc., but the image on the screen should not be affected much. More lights can be added to any viewing environment for other activities and cleaning.

Your blue color scheme is certainly better than white walls or vivid red, like we've all seen in magazine photos. Vivid colors can be added to a room as minimal accents without affecting the image. It's when they dominate the room that causes reflections back onto the screen noticeably. You have to decide what's more important to you, what the room looks like with the lights on, or what the image on the screen looks like when the room is used for projected images.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

A flat black ceiling is the best. That is the room surface closest to the screen and the most likely to wash out or tint the screen.One nice thing about the DNP SuperNova is that doesn't seem to send much light above and below and I think it might kill light coming from above and below pretty well also. I would expect it to do a good job at negating much of the negative effect of a white ceiling. I want a version with less hotspotting and less speckling to my eyes, but even so I think the current version does provide an advantage with effectively killing some reflections from the room.

--Darin

One important thing I forgot....

You well heeled "over $3500" folks are gonna have to get used to us lowly backwoods trailer park urchins form the under $3500 forum moving on into the neighborhood due to the H710AE.

BTW I have a Sony SMPTE C phosphor broadcast HD and SD monitor for my non linear edit suite that I plan on looking at compared to the SMPTE C setting of the H710 once it arrives.

If it works well, It would be great for me to actually color correct some of the commercials and other projects I edit on a projector as well as a monitor. I'll report back in a week or two once the 710 is up and running.

Darin,

Thus far, every one of the screens I've seen of this type do not provide an accurate image. They are great for providing an image that doesn't look washed out in high ambient lighting, but alter the picture in other ways. The Samsung projector offers color quality and other subtle performance issues that would be lost with such a screen.

Utility can be a legitimate priority in compromised viewing environments. This projector offers superior performance for people who value image quality over convenience. When a compromised viewing environment is of greater importance, money can be saved on the projector for the sake of brightness over subtlety. There's a big difference between a "watchable" picture and a reference image.

The screens that Joe Kane recommends to be used with this projector require certain viewing environment conditions be provided. His recommendations assume that image fidelity is the primary objective.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

GeorgeAB,

Thanks for your helpful advice.

Yes GeorgeAB, great comments on the importance of the viewing environment.

I was able to see this projector on the Home Theater Cruise last October. While the viewing environment was not optimal, it was still very interesting as Joe Kane demonstrated the difference between the NTSC (SMPTE_C) and ATSC (HD) color space options. While very subtle, selecting the right color space brings out the last bit of color resolution. Joe used the "restaurant" scene from DVE Professional (also found on DVE), and the additional color detail in food and the faces was a noticeable improvement.

Joe also put up some gray scale patterns, and it was interesting to see what a difference accurate D65 color temp makes at the lowest black levels. Most display devices have a noticeable shift in color temp below 30 IRE (e.g., the black looks blueish, reddish or greenish), but the Samsung stayed accurate down to absolute black. My impression was that this made the blacks appear blacker than they really were such that the perceived contrast ratio appeared greater than the actual contrast ratio.

Finally, the absolutely smooth appearance of the image and the integrity of the colors made this my favorite of all the projectors we saw (and they were in the $10,000 to $40,000 price range).

My two cents is that if you want a projector that produces “artificially-sweetened” eye-candy that explodes off the screen with blown-out, bluish whites, and over saturated colors, this is not the projector for you. If, however, you want the most accurate image available in this price range, this is the only way to go.

I've got one on order and can't wait to run it through its paces.

I have a Sony SMPTE C phosphor broadcast HD and SD monitor for my non linear edit suite that I plan on looking at compared to the SMPTE C setting of the H710 once it arrives.

If it works well, It would be great for me to actually color correct some of the commercials and other projects I edit on a projector as well as a monitor. I'll report back in a week or two once the 710 is up and running.As I mentioned in an earlier post, one of Joe Kane's priorities on this project was to have a projector accurate enough for production use. I think when you look at the primaries (even before calibration) you will be amazed at the results. This is why many hardcore CRT users have adopted this product as their reference for colorimetry.


Ken Whitcomb

Kevin and Ken great reviews of the 710. I have had one for 3 weeks now and love it. And coming from a Optoma I fully agree on the cartoon image that Kevin is talking about. I am using a small gray screen and colors and are so dead on it is breath taking. Black level is the best of any projector I have had to date. So don't let the 2800:1 in eco mode contrast spec keep you from buying this projector.

I think that Tom needs to test one of these. I think Optoma will lose a product tester. :D

Dale

I was able to see this projector on the Home Theater Cruise last October. While the viewing environment was not optimal, it was still very interesting as Joe Kane demonstrated the difference between the NTSC (SMPTE_C) and ATSC (HD) color space options. While very subtle, selecting the right color space brings out the last bit of color resolution. Joe used the "restaurant" scene from DVE Professional (also found on DVE), and the additional color detail in food and the faces was a noticeable improvement.

A reminder might be in order at this point. The vast majority of HD post-production monitors are direct view CRTs, with SMPTE C phosphors, using NTSC colorspace. Many video professionals have never seen HD color space. To view most HDTV programs today the same way the program producer saw it, requires setting your display for SMPTE C color space. It may be years before this changes and we will likely not know if a particular program was mastered in NTSC or HD color space.

The difference is subtle but rewarding. I've never asked Joe what monitor he used when 'Digital Video Essentials' was mastered to DVD. DVE Professional was produced some time later and offers WMV9 HD versions in the multi-disc set. DVE Pro offers both standard definition and high definition color space options for the HD material. A very high performance PC is required to view the WMV9 HD material with HD color matrix transcoding. The Samsung projector offers the capability of calibration to either SD or HD color space.

Several HDTV displays have offered color primaries that even exceed HD color space. This feature is useless unless the device includes the means to adjust the primaries to line up with the color space actually used in program production. Without such provision these devices can only deliver distorted images.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Well, count me in... I just ordered from AVS today, should be here in a couple of days. BTW, anyone scouring Froogle for the best price on this beast may want to give the boys at AVS a call, they have the best price on this piece if you include the mount they are throwing in...

As far as sources, I have had a brand new Oppo still sitting in it's unopened box for about a month now because it was "the one" for an inexpensive upconverting player. However, the 710 seems to be a poor match to the Oppo due to macroblocking as others have reported. Can anyone point me in the direction of another player that does not have any macroblocking issues? Perhaps the new Sony 75? The price sure is right...

Adam

Congratulations on the 710AE you will be happy with it. I sure am glad I got one. You may want order a replacement bulb you will be watching it alot :D I put 160hrs on mine in 1 month :eek: .

Brad

Adam
not sure on price point ? I have a Denon 2900 I have had for a while that is great with it I am getting in 2910 to see how it does over DVI ?

but I think the 2900 for its price is hard to beat ? its just finding one that is tough

As far as sources, I have had a brand new Oppo still sitting in it's unopened box for about a month now because it was "the one" for an inexpensive upconverting player. However, the 710 seems to be a poor match to the Oppo due to macroblocking as others have reported. Can anyone point me in the direction of another player that does not have any macroblocking issues? Perhaps the new Sony 75? The price sure is right...

Adam.........

How many reports of "problems" with the Oppo have you seen? I thought I saw a report of a problem with a Denon 3910, but I did not remember seeing the issue with the Oppo.....

Thx

Just opinion here on my part, but even in a compromised (I should say, slightly compromised, not drastically compromised) environment, from what I've seen, a better, more accurate projector is still a better, more accurate projector.

For example, I recently viewed a Mitsubishi HC3000 vs. an Infocus SP7205 in a room that had tan (fairly light) coloured walls with an off-white drop ceiling and a fairly dark beige carpet. There were no windows and no lamps or lights of any kind, other than the LEDs on the projectors and the components - which were on a stand on the right side of the room. With all the lights in the room turned off, it was darn near "pitch black", but, of course, with the wall and ceiling colour, it is still a compromised room.

The screen was a Da-Lite High Contrast Cinema Vision 110" screen and we were viewing it at a distance of 14 feet.

So to me, this represents a fairly "real world" type setup. It is compromised, but not drastically compromised like having windows open with sunlight streaming in or something. The walls and ceiling are not light absorbing, the screen is light grey and not perfectly accurate and even though it is darn near pitch black, there is still a very small amount of light coming from the display LEDs of the components and projectors.

In such a setup, complete accuracy is not possible, but the 7205 still provided the better, more accurate image over the HC3000. These two projectors are close in specs and close in price, but the differences were still there. So even in a compromised environment, it is still worth while to get the better, more accurate projector IMO, rather than just the less expensive, brighter one.

I would agree that in a drastically compromised environment, the subtle differences won't matter and brightness is pretty much paramount. But I think that in a slightly compromised environment, subtle differences are still important and noticable.

Just my 2 cents :p

Jon

Ditto Jon
as I have said in my light color wall room the H710 is so much nicer over the other ones I had its amazing how much nicer while we would all love a dedicated perfect HT room its not real world for many of us ;)

but the more accurate we are to start with the more we have to work with

HiHoStevo, the gentleman in this thread was using an Oppo.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=658941

Is anyone using an Oppo with this PJ? Any issues?

Well said, Jonathan.

I agree with Jonathon too, that starting with the more accurate projector is best. The problem is getting to that point of accuracy, which doesn't seem to be an issue with the 710.
I've installed many 3000's and 7205's and I think the 3000 is a much better projector than the 7205. But you've got to get the settings right or it doesn't matter much.
That's why the 710 is so appealing, it seems to truly be a plug and play machine.

The 710 will not look its best without professional calibration. There never has been a "truly plug and play" display and likely never will be. No two samples from the factory will perform exactly alike, viewing environments will vary, with two piece projection the screen type will vary, source components will vary, individual programs will vary, etc.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

No display will look it's best without calibration. But isn't the 710 going to look better than the optoma's, infocus', etc out of the box, lessening the need for calibration just to get a decent pic?

No display will look it's best without calibration. But isn't the 710 going to look better than the optoma's, infocus', etc out of the box, lessening the need for calibration just to get a decent pic?
My testing and calibration of many of these has shown that color temp, when set to 6500k, has only varied from the low 6500's to the most extreme at just over 7000. Average out of the box has been around 6650 or so. So yes, they are pretty close in that regard from the manufacturer. However, every person's room is different, and the standard adjustments such as brightness, contrast, etc... are not setup properly. So to answer your question, yes it is better than most out of the box, but as with any can use calibration to maximize performance.

You were discussing accuracy. Yes, it looks good out of the box. Do you want to settle for "decent" or do you want a genuinely reference-quality image?

This projector sold for $12,000.00 a year ago! Why not spend a little of that enormous savings and get it calibrated! Maybe we could re-name this the "AV Skinflint" forum and run a survey to collect all the possible excuses for why we shouldn't, couldn't, wouldn't pay for professional calibration. I see so many posters fretting, whining, moaning and disputing over the nuances of imaging characteristics from a display but resist the suggestion of paying a professional to set up their equipment properly.

Enough of the rant. This device deserves professional calibration. If you buy one and have to stretch your budget to get it, start saving again for calibration service. You won't be dissappointed that you spent the money to maximize its performance. An uncalibrated display diminishes the full enjoyment of everything you watch on it. Beauty is one of those things that makes life worth the living.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I think comparisons should only be made between projectors that have been calibrated, used in the same room, and used with the same screen. Otherwise, you're comparing apples to oranges. Personally, I purchased my own grey scale measuring device, as I have an electrical engineering degree and like this stuff (plus I could calibrate my RPTV many more times than I could afford to have the TV calibrated). I'm not sure whether it's applicable to front projection, though.

ctviggen,

You didn't say what your instrumentation was. To calibrate a two-piece projection system correctly you should use an instrument that can effectively measure the image from the screen. The screen is an absolutely vital component of the system and has a significant effect upon the character of the image produced.

You didn't say what your instrumentation was. To calibrate a two-piece projection system correctly you should use an instrument that can effectively measure the image from the screen. The screen is an absolutely vital component of the system and has a significant effect upon the character of the image produced.If a person chooses a StudioTek 130 screen in a good room and that screen really doesn't change the color balance then are you still claiming that the measurements need to be done off the screen? If so, why?

--Darin

Darin,

The size and type of screen determine how the brightness and contrast will be set on the projector. Those picture settings usually have an affect upon gray scale and gamma. The StudioTech 130 is a reference screen. Is it perfect? That's not likely.

In a "good" room? Define "good". Few consumers have a reference-quality room. Even if they did, would it be perfect? Again, doubtfull. At the high end of the brightness scale, light bounces off the room surfaces and back onto the screen. This contributes to the image and can affect the appearance of the grayscale. Calibration can compensate for this type of contamination.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging

When it comes time for me to purchase the 710, I am planning on a calibration. Although, not at first so I can save up a little bit for it. But, you're supposed to burn the lamp in anyway, so I think I'm ok. Then, I'll need to buy a spare lamp to avoid the one month "no projector" fiasco I just endured with my 4805. I still have nightmares about the experience. :(

My room isn't ideal, but I'm sure I'll still have a great image with the 710. I don't have a basement in my house for me to build a dedicated theater room unfortunately, so I have to do with my living room.

Do you want to settle for "decent" or do you want a genuinely reference-quality image?

This projector sold for $12,000.00 a year ago! Why not spend a little of that enormous savings and get it calibrated! Maybe we could re-name this the "AV Skinflint" forum and run a survey to collect all the possible excuses for why we shouldn't, couldn't, wouldn't pay for professional calibration. I see so many posters fretting, whining, moaning and disputing over the nuances of imaging characteristics from a display but resist the suggestion of paying a professional to set up their equipment properly.



I doubt many would disagree that excellent display devices "deserve" calibration. That said, some of us have already spent $1K or more than we originally considered to step up to this projector--it comes down to a personal decision about cost/benefit and what trade-offs one can live with. Based on others' perceptions, I think it may be selling the projector short to say that it is merely "decent" out of the box. Additionally, I would guess that my untrained brain might be more pleased with a less-than perfect image than you might be, given your trained eye and considerable expertise. In other words, relative ignorance might mean bliss for some of us.

Without trying to trigger more (justified) frustration, I wonder if you'd comment on how much of the benefit of calibration an amateur can accomplish using DVE. This is, after all, a JKP projector and I expect to improve the out-of-box performance that way (until I save up the extra potatoes and am able to justify to my wife why calibration is more important than a couple of really nice dinners away from the children).

The size and type of screen determine how the brightness and contrast will be set on the projector.
Are you going to use measuring tools to decide how to set the brightness, or your eyes? If your eyes (which are much better at seeing stuff for the brightness setting than any measuring tool I've ever seen) then I see no reason to point the sensor at the screen for that one. And how much are you going to adjust the contrast away from where it would be if you point the sensor at the projector? Are you going to lower the contrast to aim for 12 ft-lamberts (or something else), giving up dynamic range and also letting the ft-lamberts be lower than that once the bulb ages some more, or are you going to try to get the peak contrast setting that still gives you all the color balance, etc.?
Even if they did, would it be perfect? Again, doubtfull. At the high end of the brightness scale, light bounces off the room surfaces and back onto the screen. This contributes to the image and can affect the appearance of the grayscale. Calibration can compensate for this type of contamination.What would you do there if the room has neutral colors (like a gray or off-white), but still has many reflections? Change the gamma away from 2.2? If so, is that something you couldn't do having an idea of the room and what gamma to shoot for and pointing the sensor at the projector?

I am curious how you would decide to change the contrast and brightness settings between a 110" ST130 and a 100" ST130 for instance in a room that is neutral. The brightness setting usually has one spot (or two because of rounding) where the mirrors are off for video black and on for things encoded as higher than video black. Going lower than that on the Brightness setting turns the mirrors off for things that are encoded to have more light than the minimum and raising the Brightness setting above that means that the projector puts out more light than it needs to for things encoded as video black. As I basically asked above would you lower the contrast for the smaller screen and give up dynamic range?

--Darin

Darin,

This is getting quite a bit off-topic. Perhaps you should pose this question in the display calibration section of the forum. You have presented a lot of hypotheticals and theoretical considerations.

It's really pretty logical and simple. Two-piece projection is a two part display system. When considering the ideal, the room should be included as well. The only way to include all three of those elements into a calibration is to measure off of the screen. That is how we would see the performance of the total system with our eyes.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

kktx,

I would guess that my untrained brain might be more pleased with a less-than perfect image than you might be, given your trained eye and considerable expertise. In other words, relative ignorance might mean bliss for some of us.

I have no trouble enjoying a less than optimized display. It's when there are serious faults, like oversaturated color, posterization and false-contouring, really gray/green/magenta blacks, etc., that I have a hard time overlooking the defects. Most of the video images I encounter are "less than perfect." I'm just not the type of person who is comfortable using tools that aren't sharp or are out of adjustment. This forum used to be full of similar people, folks who had a passion for excellence. More and more posters in recent history seem to be mostly concerned about shaving off a few more bucks than accepting the value in something and working toward acquiring it. Why some disparage the value of something simply because they can't afford it is a mystery to me.

Without trying to trigger more (justified) frustration, I wonder if you'd comment on how much of the benefit of calibration an amateur can accomplish using DVE. This is, after all, a JKP projector and I expect to improve the out-of-box performance that way

Use of calibration DVDs is always recommended. The benefit will vary depending upon each individual's aptitude and proficiency with the test patterns and the controls provided by the display manufacturer. 'Digital Video Essentials' doesn't cover all the bases but helps the user adjust for certain variations in equipment, program content and viewing environment conditions. Such educational DVDs also train your eye for what a more accurate image is supposed to look like. This projector should delight anyone, calibrated or not. My point was, why not get the most performance out of it that's possible?

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Darin,

This is getting quite a bit off-topic. Perhaps you should pose this question in the display calibration section of the forum. You have presented a lot of hypotheticals and theoretical considerations.

It's really pretty logical and simple. Two-piece projection is a two part display system. When considering the ideal, the room should be included as well. The only way to include all three of those elements into a calibration is to measure off of the screen. That is how we would see the performance of the total system with our eyes.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

That isn't really so much the case. There isn't anything that would change based on screen size or type assuming the screen is a neutral material. When dealing with a digital display, you're mostly aligning it to the source device, and this doesn't change with screen changes, or additions of ND filters, or other changes that don't affect the relationship between input signals and the display's output. Only where the room is hideously severe might you want to depart from the "correct" settings for black level.

When you speak of measuring off the screen, I interpret that as when aligning grayscale, and that can be an issue if the screen is not neutral But other than that, you're not measuring when calibrating, so it's not a concern. I think Darin's point is just that if you have an assumed neutral screen, then there's no need to measure off the screen for that.

Chris,

Your response is debatable, but suited more for the display calibration section.