AVS Forum banner

Black Diamond 1.4 vs. DIY

17K views 195 replies 28 participants last post by  Ftoast 
#1 ·
All,

I'm new to the forum and was hoping to leverage peoples experience to help me setup a new HT. Moving into a new house and have the opportunity to start from scratch. (and would have been better to spell *Diamond correctly...can't seem to edit this now. oh well)


My room is 17' wide and 29' long. 3 windows along the outside, east wall. My plan is to pick up an Epson 5010 and BD Fixed Reference 113" 1.4gain (16:9). Since I'll have some side ambient light, I want to be sure that I'm putting together the best solution to help get maximum contrast and brightness in the setup. I figured the Epson 5010 (or 8700UB), with 2,400 lumens and 200k:1 contrast ratio, couple to the BD 1.4 gain screen, would get me there.


Here's my question. Is there a DIY screen solution, that would equal the marketed performance of the BD screen? Not sure if a painted screen, or similar, would be a "performance comparable" solution? Obviously much less expensive, but I'm not interested unless the contrast and ambient light performance is not as good.


I'm open to suggestions from learned experience. Apologies if this has been covered before, just thought I'd throw it out there and see what recommendations come back. Many thanks in advance.


Edit: The projector will be ceiling mounted, about 12' from the screen. Pool table, dart board, etc. in the back of the room. So half is for viewing movies, football, etc. while the back of the room is for playing.
 
See less See more
#102 ·
there's more ambient light on the left and it's stategically placed.

and also, they made sure there wasn't much white or light colored area... which highlights the darker screen.

but yes, it does it's job.


$3000 dollars worth? for a 100" screen? depends on the pocketbook.


i've already said... when it comes to DNP's best... no one can match it.

i've seen it with my own eyes... at CEDIA... in a completely open and fully lit auditorium...

without the cover of a tent, awning, or wall to block out the light like all the other vendors did...

and it was far more impressive than the setting shown.


so i'm not going to argue this thread anymore...

and get back to what i believe is the power of this forum... which is the power of the diy spirit as a whole.

that power that lies in the builder, the inventor, the helping hand... and the sheer joy of being proud of what you've made.


look, even the ceo of stewart admitted that he reads the diy forum on occasion because he says there's some bright people and ideas there.


i've seen some really neat things come of diy... and don't think for a minute we haven't pushed the envelope for manufactured screens...

a great example was how much improved AT material got with respect to eliminating moire, because of diy of which SMX was born.


a year ago, we wouldn't be talking about spandex for AT... etc


so really, there's no need to ridicule each others diy efforts.

because the power isn't in the ridicule and being an arm chair quarterback...


the power is in taking a good hard look at the components of someone's effort

and working with them to improve it in one way or another.
 
#103 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23196832


this is picture in not to prove any point with respect to the SF. I have no idea what the background screen is. I just wanted to show why somebody would pay so much for a projector screen


You also do not know what the PJ's output is, nor does the shot show the absolutely ridiculous difference in shade/color between the two screens.


And the image projected is only at most a 72" diagonal...if that. At CEDIA, SI was using those same small screens and 3000 lumen PJs to show off.....and all it really did was to make them seem silly to anyone who knew better.


What is shown above is a typical extreme shot that only serves as a sales tool, not anything accurately depicting the difference between similar surfaces that employ different techniques. Frankly....the Mfg would not dare do any comparison unless it was against something crazy different and wholly unsuited for the task at hand. That's just the way they roll. It certainly does not go as far as to justify a $3500.00+ expenditure.

BTW, there is obviously NO direct and very little indirect light on the front screen, as evidenced by the lack of light reflection on the upper right side of the Matte White screen. And the majority of what ambient light is present is ALL on the left side...on the White screen, and what light that is striking the "Black Screen" is definitely having an effect. They kinda made sure of that as well. Go figure.


Nope...you wanna take something apart, well then the promo images that Mfg Screen provide, as well as the displays in Trade shows are a ripe target.


Meanwhile, we will continue to provide actual real world examples.


Damn! PB beat me to the punch again!
 
  • Like
Reactions: HCORE
#104 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23196793


darker panel. darker color. check. got it.
No, you did not get it. Or, more likely, you pretend not to get it.


Black levels on the SF got worse by 50% due to ambient light increase , where as the DNP maintained the black levels unchanged under the same conditions.
 
#105 ·
MM, PB


I admit, I cannot make myself read your replies any more. Too many letters and too little information.


I'll just reiterate what I said before.


It is not not cool to mislead people about what your mixes can do. Each time I see you do this I will find time to call the BS.


It is not cool to make people use your mixes when simpler OTS solutions would do as well if not better. Each time I see you do this I will find time to call the BS. The HTS guys would never advise people to use BW or C&S if they have bright projector in a light controlled room, never.


DIY is great. But there is no need to overstate the case because it back fires. I guess it is possible that some claims you make may be true. But because the credibility is suspect there is little reason to pay attention.

As to the SF vs DNP debate, there is a simple way to get it sorted:


make somebody who owns SF screen produce a picture like this.

Edit: bad idea. the PJ used is too bright. It is not fair to expect comparable performance with typical HT projector.

 
#106 ·
Using a graphics program or color picker to "measure" contrast levels or colors in a screen shot is usually an exercise in futility. Add to this the fact that the screen shot in question has no documentation (camera used, camera settings, projector, calibration, ambient level, screen mix, etc, etc), and you have absolutely no criteria for any comparison, let alone a "scientific" one.


Given these facts, it's rather surprising to see the "measurement" camp use this for ammo against DIY. These are not measurements; they are subjective judgements at best.


If you like the conclusions you draw by examining such screen shots, by all means go ahead and buy (or make) a screen based on those conclusions. But understand that you are making a subjective judgment, not a scientific one. You will be in good company, though, since nearly everyone makes their AV purchase decisions based on taste anyway. And that is the point here.
 
#109 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by prof55  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23197727


Using a graphics program or color picker to "measure" contrast levels or colors in a screen shot is usually an exercise in futility. Add to this the fact that the screen shot in question has no documentation (camera used, camera settings, projector, calibration, ambient level, screen mix, etc, etc), and you have absolutely no criteria for any comparison, let alone a "scientific" one.


Given these facts, it's rather surprising to see the "measurement" camp use this for ammo against DIY. These are not measurements; they are subjective judgements at best.


If you like the conclusions you draw by examining such screen shots, by all means go ahead and buy (or make) a screen based on those conclusions. But understand that you are making a subjective judgment, not a scientific one. You will be in good company, though, since nearly everyone makes their AV purchase decisions based on taste anyway. And that is the point here.

I would have agreed with what you said if we were comparing different screenies. But in this case the color picker is a reliable instrument, especially so because the areas compared are very close to each other and the brightness differences are so vast.


In fact the differences are so apparent to the naked eye that the color picker may be needed only to evaluate the degree.


As to me buying one of these screens, I do not really need it. I have light controlled theater room.When ambient light is not a factor, the differences between the DNP and simple over the shelf color neutral paint is very subtle, certainly not worth the price difference IMHO
 
#112 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23197765


why don't you do it then?


it is Epson EMP-8300 pj according to the article.


not a power-horse by any stretch of imagination.

No need to duplicate the pic, this is a good opportunity to use some specs. Assuming the arm spread of the man is six feet, this gives us a projected image size of around 57" diagonal. (Yes, I measured with Photoshop.) The lack of shadows would suggest this is not a bright sunny day, and could easily be quite overcast. With the Epson at its rated output of 5200 lumens, this translates into a screen brightness of 362fL.


Given that the recommendation for the average home theater is 16fL, this would mean that the screen in your picture is a wee bit brighter than normal, in fact nearly 23 times brighter. Hardly a valid test of "real world" performance, really just an advertising gimmick. But it convinced you, and that is why I maintain that subjective judgment is useful, when properly applied.
 
#116 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by prof55  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23197846


No need to duplicate the pic, this is a good opportunity to use some specs. Assuming the arm spread of the man is six feet, this gives us a projected image size of around 57" diagonal. (Yes, I measured with Photoshop.) The lack of shadows would suggest this is not a bright sunny day, and could easily be quite overcast. With the Epson at its rated output of 5200 lumens, this translates into a screen brightness of 362fL.


Given that the recommendation for the average home theater is 16fL, this would mean that the screen in your picture is a wee bit brighter than normal, in fact nearly 23 times brighter. Hardly a valid test of "real world" performance, really just an advertising gimmick. But it convinced you, and that is why I maintain that subjective judgment is useful, when properly applied.

your calculations seem reasonable. I just need to see a similar screenshot of projection on a SF surface to be fully convinced.
 
#120 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by prof55  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy/90#post_23198044


I can't help but admire a man who admits getting educated. My hat's off to you, Zheka. We would all do well to show more of this spirit.

I agree, myself included. I've been learning and applying what I've learned on / from this Forum now for almost 12 years. And to this day I still learn more almost every day spent.


About all I have ever wished was for those who are exposed to overt attempts to discount some things many have found to be "workable" was to look beyond the rhetoric and smokescreens and judge things as they really are.


Here are some facts.


1. Absolutely, we can and have created High Gain screens(2.0+) that do essentially the same job as the far more expensive and elaborate Mfg versions. I have included a few examples below.


2. In the most extreme cases, where extreme gain was matched up with normal Lumen output, we run into the same caveats as virtually all the Mfg do when they "go there". Narrowed Viewing Cone, and Graininess (...although we have reduced that considerably...it is still present in higher gain examples...)


3. That being the case,we do not usually advocate the use of such applications, owing instead to suggest less "gain oriented" versions (1.3 and under) While these applications do not totally reach the same performance levels of a DNP Flagship Screen, they do come close enough to effectively render the need of any budget-oriented PJ enthusiast to spend $3k+ on a SI-BD or DNP pretty much moot. Of course that is the devout DIY'er in me relating that. Those with expendable income or who feel that DIY'ing at an advanced level is simply not what they are willing to get into....they need not worry. There are those alternatives available to them. That's what the "Screens" Forum is there for.


4. As those who know such, I do in fact offer advice to those whose needs or expressed desire run toward simple Gray and White applications. And Spandex. And BOC / Cloth-Vinyl Material. While those applications do not take nearly the amount of precedent nor demand the attention of the advanced apps, it is certainly not the case that they are ever excluded from consideration out of hand.


5. We (PB & I) have no vested interest in focusing on specific applications other than to try our very best to match up what we feel would be best for a given situation. It is / would be inordinately unfair and pretty strange to expect that we would ignore what we think is optimal simply to suggest something sub-standard to put a different light (...a horrible pun....) on the referral process.


These first 3 examples are shot with a light Gray DaLite HCCV screen as the backdrop, and with considerable ambient present coming from multiple ceiling fixtures . Note how the SF-HG ramps up brightness but also vastly improves Black levels. It should also be pointed out that the Whites remained almost ristine and bright as well. Not absolutely perfect...but gud 'enuff for most souls to accept as being a great improvement.


Physics be gol'durned!

http://s586.photobucket.com/user/Mi...t Shots/AmbientExample3a_zpsd67910e3.jpg.html

http://s586.photobucket.com/user/Mi...ht Shots/AmbientExample2_zps7f93cd21.jpg.html

http://s586.photobucket.com/user/Mi...ht Shots/AmbientExample3_zps7de2fa64.jpg.html



A SF v2.5 HG -7.0 sample against SF v2.1 -3.0



The Screen is being inundated by 2 100 watt Floods positioned directly overhead.[/B][/B]









A SF v2.5 HG -6.0 sample against SF v2.1 -3.0


The Screen is being inundated by 2 100 watt Floods positioned directly overhead.





As stated, the images shown represent very high gain examples of SF screens, and they have extremely dark surfaces. They show exactly why DIY can and does aspire to create applications few have thought possible.


BTW, the PJ used was a Epson 9350. No slouch....but certainly not a proverbial "Light Cannon" by any means.


........and a big PS


Great to see you post up prof55. We all miss your levelheaded approach to considering all aspects of DIY Screen making and the methods / results involved.
 
#121 ·
Looks pretty impressive to my eyes.
 
#122 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooleyone  /t/1419985/black-diamond-1-4-vs-diy#post_22213553


All,

I'm new to the forum and was hoping to leverage peoples experience to help me setup a new HT. Moving into a new house and have the opportunity to start from scratch. (and would have been better to spell *Diamond correctly...can't seem to edit this now. oh well)


My room is 17' wide and 29' long. 3 windows along the outside, east wall. My plan is to pick up an Epson 5010 and BD Fixed Reference 113" 1.4gain (16:9). Since I'll have some side ambient light, I want to be sure that I'm putting together the best solution to help get maximum contrast and brightness in the setup. I figured the Epson 5010 (or 8700UB), with 2,400 lumens and 200k:1 contrast ratio, couple to the BD 1.4 gain screen, would get me there.


Here's my question. Is there a DIY screen solution, that would equal the marketed performance of the BD screen? Not sure if a painted screen, or similar, would be a "performance comparable" solution? Obviously much less expensive, but I'm not interested unless the contrast and ambient light performance is not as good.


I'm open to suggestions from learned experience. Apologies if this has been covered before, just thought I'd throw it out there and see what recommendations come back. Many thanks in advance.


Edit: The projector will be ceiling mounted, about 12' from the screen. Pool table, dart board, etc. in the back of the room. So half is for viewing movies, football, etc. while the back of the room is for playing.

Alternative to a BD is a Draper React 2.1 pictured with a 60w lamp.

 
#125 ·
The Draper's performance in the Photo and the explanation on You Tube are both pretty singular purposed, to promote their consideration for use. But they both fall short.


Much has been said about "Hot Spotting" and the Photo shows it in it's truest form. A distinct and obvious difference between the Center and Edges of the screen. The 60 watt un-shielded Florescent is a pretty weak "control" light source to tout when one considers both the Ultra Dark Gray Draper's surface, and the fact that it is getting walloped by the 5010s 2400 lumen output and 200K contrast. It's obvious that the disparity between the Light Source's intensity and the highly direction aspect of the 90 degree viewing angle ( only 45 degrees Off-Center viewing to 1/2 Gain)


Then there is the fact that the Draper's design requires a Tab Tensioned approach, adding considerable expense to a application that already has some distinct disadvantages.


It's always has been hard to justify the expense -to- performance comparison between the more advanced DIY Screen applications and their Mfg counterparts. Perhaps even more so when the Bright White DIY screens are matched up against expensive "Reference White" Mfg Screens. But that is what makes DIY'er who have accomplished great performing DIY Screens so adamant in their professions of the worthiness of such.


Now there can be no doubting Draper's credentials, nor that the shown product is doing what they intended, and with what is a more basic approach than the BD or DNP screens. Just a Dark Gray surface that has a slight polish to it to create 1.1 gain. But that "polish" only shows why in DIY we avoid upping gain by creating "sheen". That's a lesson we learned and took to breast long ago, and compensated with controlled metallic content within a translucent Gray Base. And the use of a Tab Tensioned surface in a "Retractable" situation is always preferred, the additional expense notwithstanding.


That is why I used a Focupix 106" Tab Tensioned Screen for a "Canvass" for Silver Fire in the instances below. One thing that immediately stands out is the intensity of light in the room almost completely illuminates the room, yet the projected image is still not just watchable, it's at a "highly entertaining" level. The results shown are to be compared against Mfg.Screens with a higher level performance than the Draper, and at even higher price points.


First, a shot of the screen in high ambient light. You will not that the shade of Gray is not nearly as dark as what is seen on the Draper in the You Tube Vidio




Why should anyone have to be content with a 90 degree limitation of Viewing Angle when DIY can provide both gain, ambient light view-ability, and almost 180 degrees of viewing potential.









And some more various examples......the first under the most extreme circumstances (11 AM)











Some show the Room / Screen under 3 separate lighting conditions:

No lights w/ low ambient Sunlight leakage

Additional 25% Can Lighting w/Flood Bulbs
(...yeech...should be "Spots"....)
...and will be soon !
Full on 100% Floods. (...not a real world circumstance but an effective comparison to show that resistance to such lighting is actually happening...)



The first 3 shots on the left side of the first composite were taken at 4:30 PM after the Sun had passed the south facing Window. All the others were takem mid-morning to just past Noon when the Sun was hitting the Window full on.














Room shots and a close up of the Viewsonic PJD 6683ws Short Throw PJ http://www.projectorcentral.com/ViewSonic-PJD6683ws.htm


 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top