Black Diamond 1.4 vs. DIY - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 12:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
That's it. smile.gif Think of a zoom lens on a camera. Until you get to a pretty spendy lens, as you increase zoom max aperture decreases. (Goes up numerically.) If you have the right lens, brightness wouldn't be affected by zoom either. Take the Sony HW50. Brightness is only marginally affected by zoom. Sony can do that in this price range because they use a plastic lens. Also, it's a lot easier to build a wide angle large aperture fixed zoom lens than a variable zoom lens. My guess is that is what accounts for the brightness difference between the two PJs in question. So, in effect, the shorter throw is responsible for the 25% increase in brightness. Although I could easily be wrong about that. Given how sensitive the focus is on the Epson, it must be using a pretty large aperture. (Depth of Field decreases with a large aperture.)
Kirnak is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 06:37 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Using a small degree of the Camera's zoom to attenuate incoming light when taking Screenies is a well known procedure. Even a well balanced PJ / Screen equation can be difficult for a good SLR to meter correctly, especially in a darkened setting.

Many think that a Screenie is too easily used to capture a image that is falsely represented as being "too Bright & Vibrant" when in fact most are either too dim or too washed out.

I seldom suggest that a PJ be placed at the innermost Throw location possible, but within 10% of that distance does not seem detrimental if the PJ's optics are decent.

As for the Viewsonics seeming disparity in brightness, one must remember that it's fixed lens must disperse the light output very widely over a very short distance. This tends to attenuate the given ability of a surface to reflect too much back from any given area, even dead center. All that providing that the PJ's optics are indeed worthy. I've seen Ultra Short Throw PJs with centralized hot spotting that looked like the center of the screen was a vignette photograph.

Insomuch as most uses for Short Throw PJs involve Classroom / Boardroom uses, it seems reasonable that the Projector Central Calculator defaults to the "Data / Graphics" setting. Even so, the reason ST=PJs have additional brightness is to both accommodate brighter settings AND to compensate for the need for excessive light distribution over a wide area from a very short throw.

Now things would be entirely different if the brightness was being focused "Down" to the smallest image possible from the closest Thrown allowable. Then one could easily state that unfair advantage is being taken when showing off reflective performance. Once again, referencing Member buds example how a ultra small image from a very bright PJ can produce a excellent image on even a Black surface ius appropriate, as it shows the difference between over zealous use of "lens-ing" as opposed to what happens when a Lens is used within it's design parameters.

Personally, I feel the stated brightness (fl) specifications on the PC-Calculator are based on a generalized math formula and do not take into account the actual performance effects of the Viewsonic's lens. I's be greatly surprised if that program has so much detailed data available as to allow for every variable and difference in each PJ's design. In fact, the Program itself has always been determined to be "close" 90% of the time, but vary quite widely at others...while at times it is WAY off base.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #153 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 06:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kevin 3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
This is the type of picture to really show how a screen deals with ambient light.
Source material CGI.

.
Kevin 3000 is offline  
post #154 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 06:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 17
If you're familiar with PC's reviews...
you find over and over again that PC's reviews most often gives reviews of not only the real world numbers of PRESENTATION pj's... but also their real numbers when used and optimize for video viewing

over and over again, you'll see PRESENTATON pj's actual lumen output is only 25-35% of the manufacturers stated lumens.

take a look at several VIewsonic pj reviews and you see that their 2500lumen presenation pj's have less than 500lumens when calibrated for video.

as or their calculator... i can't imagine that they would take real world data of every pj in their database... so either manufacturer's overly inflated numbers are often used or a percentage of such. secondly their calc, basically, sets to
default presentation mode for all non 1080 pj's.

in short, do not be fool by a presentation pj's atated lumens/fl's... while they may be good for still black and white text... they lack power and contrast and make poor candidates for viewing video.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #155 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 07:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 17
here's real world image of how BD's 1.4 deals with ambient light (coming from upper left ceiling area)


considering that this screenie is not hit with an overabundance of ambient light...
notice the fluxuation of black levels from the upper left corner of the BD sample to the bottom right area of the sample.
the sample used was approx 4.5' x 2.5'
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #156 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 08:09 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin 3000 View Post

This is the type of picture to really show how a screen deals with ambient light.
Source material CGI.

.

And a very good job it's doing, if you care to note that the scene shown is essentially a Black one, with only the central subject "spotlighted", and the room is simply awash in very "sunlight sourced" high ambient light....and even the Can lights are on. In fact the light level in the room is so high, most would discount the very ability of almost "ANY" screen to even allow any decent viewing. Also, the photo of the screen was taken at a severe angle, something that would present what some would say would have to be at least only 1/2 gain at best. (...which we of course do not adhere to as being a spec SF is saddled with....) That was the intention behind the Image's composition. No attempt to mitigate the ambient light's effects were made.

So the intent of your post and comment was to imply what? Kudos or Complaints? Or just an expression of the image being an ideal representation of how bright a room should be when trying to show how well any given Ambient Light Screen can / will perform? I'm honestly not sure, because it seems to be a bit ambiguous.

I will state though that I see no other such efforts in that degree of ambient light ever attempted by any other DIY Screen application, and any such attempt done by a Mfg Screen is usually a double exposure kinda thing....to fool people. Usually. The very best DNP has to offer can get'ter dun, but at the cost involved the Screen should have an Ignition Key and be able to let you drive it to work.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #157 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 08:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kevin 3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
This must be a different screen as the above 1, same lights on sun shining?
Kevin 3000 is offline  
post #158 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 09:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
C'mon now...don't tempt me to say how silly that sounds, because I will not rise to that bait.biggrin.gif

So no. It obviously cannot be. rolleyes.gif The Screen is "Built-into" a solid valance, and you can be certain it was not "changed' to accommodate taking different images. But ya also gotta know, Clouds, the time of day and direction of the Sun (...that window is facing directly south...) all tend to make the degree of variable light intrusion be different.

That is why, if you bother to look closely at every shot, you can see how I took great pains to include shots at every possible time of day, and with a variety of content. I took shots with /without Cans and lamps on as well as adjusting the Can's output using a Dimmer, from "Full on" down to "Almost Off". The images on the left show exactly that, as you can plainly see that the color of the curtains, owing to the Sunlight shining through them, does NOT change.No effort to optimize results here! You should note that the bottom left image shows a light level more akin to the large example, and the screen shows a representation that is very closely matched. The other images are all at times when there was less light coming in. Also, when the light is more intense, the curtains change color....going from a very light greenish-tan to a deeper Golden color.

And in the original posting, it was stated that the images shown represented a gradual shifting from Dark to Lighter room conditions. And I played that movie a lot during the show, at several different times. People do tend to like it. wink.gif

No screen / Mfg or DIY exists that can deal with such intense ambient light and always present an identical image such as it would in a more ideally suited, no changing situation that has lessor degree of such light present. While some might indeed have a less wider gulf exist between such circumstances, they all will be affected to some degree.

But you can also be certain no Mfg Screen maker in a right mind would ever present such variables. That would be very ineffectual advertising and very counter productive as well.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #159 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 09:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kevin 3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Looking closer I see the ceiling spots in some shots way overexposed unnaturally adding light to the room skewing the actual in room light.

When the above BD sample is along side the DIY mix the OP will see the differences and make a judgement call.

Today those DNP screens would be my choice.
Kevin 3000 is offline  
post #160 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
zheka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirnak View Post

That's it. smile.gif Think of a zoom lens on a camera. Until you get to a pretty spendy lens, as you increase zoom max aperture decreases. (Goes up numerically.) If you have the right lens, brightness wouldn't be affected by zoom either. Take the Sony HW50. Brightness is only marginally affected by zoom. Sony can do that in this price range because they use a plastic lens. Also, it's a lot easier to build a wide angle large aperture fixed zoom lens than a variable zoom lens. My guess is that is what accounts for the brightness difference between the two PJs in question. So, in effect, the shorter throw is responsible for the 25% increase in brightness. Although I could easily be wrong about that. Given how sensitive the focus is on the Epson, it must be using a pretty large aperture. (Depth of Field decreases with a large aperture.)

the aperture range for the Epson is f/2.0 - f/3.2. It looks like the 2.5 times difference in brightness between minimum and maximum zoom level is fully consistent with the f-numbers.
zheka is offline  
post #161 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 09:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin 3000 View Post

Looking closer I see the ceiling spots in some shots way overexposed unnaturally adding light to the room skewing the actual in room light.

Are you trying to say that by having the Lights on so high that they are overexposed when the camera meters the light coming from the screen? That's crazy talk! Just note how much higher the reflected light level from the walls and ceiling surfaces are. The reason the Lights seem overexposed is because they are "Full On" and bright as hell!

Golly, gee whiz. What are you really reaching for here? It would seem to be a entire case of "Straws". biggrin.gif

To keep on making such statements really alludes to posting "bait' for responses, not anything that actually makes sense. And when one takes notice of your last edited post above, it becomes obvious that such nonsensical postings do in fact have a motive behind them. Promoting Mfg over DIY on this DIY screen forum.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #162 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 09:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kevin 3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Are you trying to say that by having the Lights on so high that they are overexposed when the camera meters the light coming from the screen? That's crazy talk! Just note how much higher the reflected light level from the walls and ceiling surfaces are. The reason the Lights seem overexposed is because they are "Full On" and bright as hell!

Golly, gee whiz. What are you really reaching for here? It would seem to be a entire case of "Straws". biggrin.gif

To keep on making such statements really alludes to posting "bait' for responses, not anything that actually makes sense. And when one takes notice of your last edited post above, it becomes obvious that such nonsensical postings do in fact have a motive behind them. Promoting Mfg over DIY on this DIY screen forum.

Sorry to rattle your cage MM
I am entitled to my opinion and my advice is genuine.
Kevin 3000 is offline  
post #163 of 179 Old 04-16-2013, 10:56 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin 3000 View Post

Sorry to rattle your cage MM
I am entitled to my opinion and my advice is genuine.
Certainly you are entitled. But your also "genuinely" mistaken, wrong, or worse....intentionally misconstruing facts. You do not bother to address my response, because there can be no rebuttal that would not make it all seem even more obviously silly. In any case, what you relate is so obviously off base that I'm certain anyone else will ignore it.

Have a nice day.....really.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #164 of 179 Old 05-25-2013, 02:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kevin 3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin 3000 View Post

Looking closer I see the ceiling spots in some shots way overexposed unnaturally adding light to the room skewing the actual in room light.

When the above BD sample is along side the DIY mix the OP will see the differences and make a judgement call.

Today those DNP screens would be my choice.

6 weeks still no A/B comparisons?
I really thought you had a viable solution after all these years of mixing paint.
No proof no solution.
Kevin 3000 is offline  
post #165 of 179 Old 05-25-2013, 06:45 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Sorry Bub,

It has not been on my agenda to concern myself with trying to accommodate your "request". The simple fact is you choose to ignore or dismiss the many examples that have adequately shown the abilities of Silver Fire across many varied platforms and shade variations. And of course, you choose not to address how such a counter request made on the BD thread would be received. You want to have things be as you want them to...not how Forum rules and decorum dictate they should be.

You seem to also be ignoring the recent spate of dissatisfied BD owners, something we have not bothered / you do not bother to hold up for scrutiny.

It's obvious the the reasons for you posts have not changed. They are nothing but attempts to interfere and disrupt the flow of help going out to DIY'ers who have no intention of even remotely considering the purchase of a over-priced and issue plagued Mfg screen.

If it means so much to you to see proof via a comparison, (ie: desperate to see proof of "your" opinion with your own eyes) then your welcome to send me a BD Screen, or sizable enough sample (2' x 2') and I'll put it up for comparison.

But you see, you have never been pro-active at anything except being contentious and dismissive...the latter without having any proof of your own except your opinions. Instead, you ignore obvious and extreme example such as shown above, examples of results you do not ever see posted that involve BD Screens

No proof of your own opinion is far worse than any lack of direct comparisons between a DIY screen application that has a great many satisfied end users, and a Mfg screen that many lament haven chosen.

It's been said over and over, the DIY Forum is not a Pulpit for those who advocate the purchase of ANY Mfg Screen over any DIY screen, to try to convince the Posters of this Forum of the validity of their opinions. That fact alone, and your continual efforts put you right where everyone can see you for what you are and are trying to accomplish.

Which essentially is not very much of anything at all.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #166 of 179 Old 05-25-2013, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smokarz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Posts: 3,282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin 3000 View Post

6 weeks still no A/B comparisons?
I really thought you had a viable solution after all these years of mixing paint.
No proof no solution.


Did you just asked for 'proof'?

eek.gif
smokarz is offline  
post #167 of 179 Old 05-25-2013, 03:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
superleo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX - USA
Posts: 2,164
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 228
There are plenty of very happy and content DIY screens of many and different types...

Is seems funny to me that people want to proof, or in this case disproof something, but never show anything themselves. Such as Kevin's digital vs CRT screenshots... do they prove that they are better? IMHO, it only prove that they are comparable, NOT better. Going back to our DIY screens - are they better than the commercial ones... To some and many they are... just like you said it - Depends who you ask, and if you want data, then depends how that data was measured...

You like commercial screens, go post over there! Once again JMHO.

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."
Screening Room - The Dream House
RPCRT-TV Overscan Reduction
Reference Blu-Ray Demo Disc

Reference 2: Blu-Ray Demo Disc

The Best of the Demo Discs Demo Disc

superleo is offline  
post #168 of 179 Old 05-29-2013, 08:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smokarz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Posts: 3,282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by superleo View Post

There are plenty of very happy and content DIY screens of many and different types...

Is seems funny to me that people want to proof, or in this case disproof something, but never show anything themselves. Such as Kevin's digital vs CRT screenshots... do they prove that they are better? IMHO, it only prove that they are comparable, NOT better. Going back to our DIY screens - are they better than the commercial ones... To some and many they are... just like you said it - Depends who you ask, and if you want data, then depends how that data was measured...

You like commercial screens, go post over there! Once again JMHO.


I generally agree with you.

There are many happy users of DIY screens of various types. And there are many happy users of commercial screens of various types.

It depends on who you ask and their personal preferences.

HOWEVER. When someone continuously and consistently make wild and fact less claims that their DIY screen solution is the best there is, and that it can beat $10k commercial screens in all aspects of visual reproduction. You are expected to provide proof. It's just common sense. Otherwise, you're just speaking out of your ass. JMHO.
zheka likes this.
smokarz is offline  
post #169 of 179 Old 05-29-2013, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
superleo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX - USA
Posts: 2,164
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 228
Expected? Am I missing something? No need to answer just rhetorical.
If someone's experience is not enough for you, And YOU expect/want some proof, what ever that means, you can bring that disproof to the rest of us, and again JMHO.

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."
Screening Room - The Dream House
RPCRT-TV Overscan Reduction
Reference Blu-Ray Demo Disc

Reference 2: Blu-Ray Demo Disc

The Best of the Demo Discs Demo Disc

superleo is offline  
post #170 of 179 Old 05-29-2013, 09:00 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
That last statement in the post above is so false and essentially such a over wrought statement, it doesn't merit even the dignity of a detailed response.

But I'll ask this of the author. Go find your "proof" I ever have stated what you attribute to me...... " that their (my) DIY screen solution is the best there is, and that it can beat $10k commercial screens in all aspects of visual reproduction".

You will come up hopelessly empty, and only prove to yourself your own excessive and continual effort to speak out of your own ....hind end. I do doubt though you'll come back to tell others on here of that failure. biggrin.gif

You know...you don't have to carry the ball / Torch for others' stated opinions and agendas found elsewhere on the Web, here on this Forum. It's really quite undignified. Very "Lemming-like".

Oops...I see Leo is now the last previous post. OK....the Post above his.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #171 of 179 Old 05-29-2013, 09:17 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
On a separate note, The Black Diamond 1.4 is taking a beating on it's own thread, and the responses to complaints and concerns are deemed feckless ones at best.

It's an expensive...and fault ridden screen. When you see the Vendor actually post how Graininess and loss of viewing cone must go hand in hand with whatever performance gains are obtained at such high prices.......

......well over the years I've seen plenty of Mfg of all sorts of things have to backtrack and exercise damage control. That is EXACTLY what SI-BD Vendors have to do now. It was their own Sales Hype, misleading published depictions and slanted Show Presentations, and unsubstantiated claims in promotion that led them to the state of affairs that is rapidly building up to a real backlash......

Hell yeah! I KNOW a $250.00 DIY version can outgun a $3500.00 Mfg Screen when ALL factors are fully taken into considerations. Personally....I don't know of any $10,000 Mfg Screens that have ever been featured on the Forum. Excluding huge Commercial Cineplex versions.

And in truth....I've seen Basic White paint do a better job splashed onto a 32' x 18' surface than ANY Mfg Screen material. It was easy really..and no contest. cool.gif

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #172 of 179 Old 07-10-2013, 10:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi,

I'm new to this thread, so I apologize if my questions below have been asked before. I've been looking at and considering a BD screen for the last 5 years. I finally got to see one in action (in person), as question #5 indicates below. If anyone can help, I'd appreciate it. I'm intrigued by the idea of doing a DIY screen, instead of the megabucks for the BD.

1) The BD can be seen in video to reduce the amount of light reflected off of the screen into the room, thus allowing it to be used in rooms that do not have ideal paint colors. Does the DIY screen do the same thing?

2) I live in the Phoenix, AZ area. What is currently the best material to use for the DIY screen? I have textured walls, so I would prefer not to paint the wall, I'd rather mount something so that it is floating - kind of like the BD zero edge.

3) Screen Innovations claims that their screens increase the contrast by 900%. Do the DIY screens do the same?

4) The claims for the BD screen are that, even with the 1.4 material, the screen is dark enough that masking is not necessary. Seems like the DIY screen, from the few pictures I've seen, is a lighter grey - meaning that it would probably be more noticable. Any thoughts on this?

5) I helped a friend of mine install his Sony HW30es projector and 106" BD 1.4 screen last year. It looked good, but something seemed to bother me. It wasn't the hotspotting. Seems like I was seeing the pixels or some other structure there - it wasn't as smooth as I was expecting the picture to be. Is that the grain that you are talking about?

6) What are the cons of using a DIY screen, instead of a BD?

7) Any other pros/cons of either solution?

8) Kevin 3000 - I tthought you had a BD screen? If so, do you still like it a lot? I noticed you mentioned that the DNP would be your screen of choice - can you explain why?


Thanks all!

Dave

FOR SALE: Wireworld Platinum 6 1M HDMI Cable. Originally $1000, selling for $500 obo. Please PM me, if interested.
thezaks is offline  
post #173 of 179 Old 07-10-2013, 03:43 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Whoa...once more into the breach we go.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post

Hi,

I'm new to this thread, so I apologize if my questions below have been asked before. I've been looking at and considering a BD screen for the last 5 years. I finally got to see one in action (in person), as question #5 indicates below. If anyone can help, I'd appreciate it. I'm intrigued by the idea of doing a DIY screen, instead of the megabucks for the BD.

Ok...your request comes along with / for all the right reasons. Let's address the questions.
Quote:
1) The BD can be seen in video to reduce the amount of light reflected off of the screen into the room, thus allowing it to be used in rooms that do not have ideal paint colors. Does the DIY screen do the same thing?

Yes....but mostly we corral that feature so as to keep the more detrimental aspects of such retro-reflective screens under control. Your own comments below allude to you already acknowledging that such adverse aspects exist. Varying degrees of such Retro-Reflectivity can be designed in easily enough...but if done so, one has to accept whatever level of compromises come along with it.

Here is an example of normal Ambient light performance, and the same application treated to a high gain solution.




Quote:
2) I live in the Phoenix, AZ area. What is currently the best material to use for the DIY screen? I have textured walls, so I would prefer not to paint the wall, I'd rather mount something so that it is floating - kind of like the BD zero edge.

You mean like this?







In answer to the "material" question.....Sintra / Komatex Expanded PVC Sheeting is among the best overall substrate to paint upon, as it is specifically made for Sign Painting, it's ultra smooth and almost unbreakable, and it comes in sizes up to 10' x 5' (6mm thickness is the preferred choice)
Quote:
3) Screen Innovations claims that their screens increase the contrast by 900%. Do the DIY screens do the same?

That is a crazy claim that has not been substantiated by a single reputable independent published test...or any published test for that matter.

It's all subjective stuff. Silver Fire v2.5 in it's darker versions (4.0-5.0-on up ) easily matches the BD 1.4 in that it's ambient performance levels do as much or more than it's Mfg counterpart.

You be the judge, and no CGI Eye Candy here....in some very obtuse ambient light. :






Quote:
4) The claims for the BD screen are that, even with the 1.4 material, the screen is dark enough that masking is not necessary. Seems like the DIY screen, from the few pictures I've seen, is a lighter grey - meaning that it would probably be more noticable. Any thoughts on this?

First off, of all the 'reviews" about the BD 1.4 that I have read....most of them primarily coming from end users on this Forum, the "No masking needed" claim is overstated. Certainly there is some reduction, but it's a well known fact among Silver Fire users that even the lighter shades of Silver Fire do more proportionate "masking" (...and have better ambient light performance...) than BD screens do being 2x or more darker in shade.

No matter what else, the unused portion of screen will never show any darker than it's actual color, unless a projected "Mask" is in use. So yes...a darker shade of Gray Screen will always look darker than a lighter shade. But there is a little "SF" magic to be had depending upon the PJs own Light spillage tendencies. Silver Fire will, in a darkened environment, show a blacker field when the PJ does not have true masking ability. And if the PJ does...then it's essentially going to be a even playing field.
Quote:
5) I helped a friend of mine install his Sony HW30es projector and 106" BD 1.4 screen last year. It looked good, but something seemed to bother me. It wasn't the hotspotting. Seems like I was seeing the pixels or some other structure there - it wasn't as smooth as I was expecting the picture to be. Is that the grain that you are talking about?

You get off easy on this one, because the answer is easy. Yes. And graininess is one of the chief concerns we have as far as avoiding such .
Quote:
6) What are the cons of using a DIY screen, instead of a BD?

  • You usually have to make it yourself
  • It will turn out only as good as you can make it.
  • You will have a considerable amount of cash left over to get yourself into trouble with.

Quote:
7) Any other pros/cons of either solution?

BD Pros:
  • ?
  • ??
  • If you want to / MUST buy something in a Mfg Screen that works better in ambient light than a common High Contrast Gray Screen....it's there for you.

BD Cons:
  • It costs a lot of money, so much that it's performance and image quality gains do not equal the expenditure.
  • Performance on most all fronts is compromised by other detrimental aspects that are directly tied to such performance.
  • If the surface is ever damaged or soiled...your SOL & UACWAP

Silver Fire Pros:
  • It is a very high performance DIY Screen that is almost infinitely adjustable to any viewing condition or an PJs attributes.
  • Size and Format limitations are virtually non-existent, and Silver Fire can be applied on almost any smooth surface.
  • It is not really a difficult "Do", and a DIY'er has all the support he needs on this Forum to be assured of success.
  • Easily repairable via a re-coating (spot or full surface) or changed - upgraded via the same process.
  • Cost-wise, at it's topmost estimates, when everything including a Spray Rig is needed, it seldom exceeds $300.00 total. 10x less than a BD


Silver Fire Cons:
  • It needs to be done right the first time to avoid re-dos, because re-dos cost extra.
  • You have to exercise at least some degree of DIY effort to getter dun.
  • You have to develop thick skin as far as trying to ward off Friends and Neighbors who will insist on making themselves "invited" every chance they can.

8) Kevin 3000 - I thought you had a BD screen? If so, do you still like it a lot? I noticed you mentioned that the DNP would be your screen of choice - can you explain why?


Thanks all!

Dave[/quote]

I'll venture this as far as an answer to 8)

We do not bother to even judge Silver Fire against the BD line-up. Our goals have been met and exceeded on that score. DNP Screens are a more loftier goal, and in many respects, we are approaching their best offerings, and have already surpassed their .08 material.

But then again, if one bothers to take cost as it relates to value & performance into consideration, really...there is no contest between a DNP and Silver Fire if a DIY'er is willing and ready to go for it.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #174 of 179 Old 07-10-2013, 05:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Wow! Thanks so much for all the answers! Since seeing the BD in person this past year, I cannot convince myself that the BD is truly for me. It's that grain that really bothers me. My friend loves his BD screen and thinks it's one of the best investments he has made. I couldn't bring myself to point out what I was seeing.

Switching gears, I always thought I wanted a JVC projector, so that I could get the best black levels and contrast. However, I'm not sure 1200 lumens is enough to use a projector as a TV for daytime use, in addition to night use. So, I was thinking of the Sony HW50 or the Epson 5020ub. However, you mentioned that the Epson 6020ub can get about twice the FL in similar setups. I had thought the projectors had similar specs, so just wondering how it gets twice the FL. Perhaps the 6020ub would be a better choice?

Again, thank you!

Dave

FOR SALE: Wireworld Platinum 6 1M HDMI Cable. Originally $1000, selling for $500 obo. Please PM me, if interested.
thezaks is offline  
post #175 of 179 Old 07-11-2013, 06:24 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Excessive graininess (...at least to my taste) is what has kept the above shown High Gain SF examples from being suggested on here.

I have used them for 200"+ screens, Commercially oriented ones that were mounted so that the closest a viewer could get was 20' or so. Gain on those applications is estimated to exceed 3.5+ easily. But for Home use, hauling up at about 1.3 gain will suffice for virtually anyone's needs, especially if excellent Contrast enhancing capability is there.

Really, on this Forum dedicated to DIY Screens, it's always a little crazy when a comparison is made between a $3K+ Mfg screen and a $2-300.00 DIY'er. Resentment at the sheer audacity of even considering that DIY can measure up against such offerings can rear up quickly. Over the years, it was always understood easily enough that people pursuing DIY Screen making were just not able or interested in spending such sums on a Screen. To the serious Videophile, a DIY Screen was simply a laughable attempt to have something for next to nothing. So no one advocating Mfg Screens really worried much about them.

But starting around 2004, that all changed because DIY Screens started making serious inroads on Mfg Screen sales to those who were teeter-tottering between Mfg Screen choices. Advanced DIY Screen applications become so popular, a new breed of disclaimers arose....those who themselves would not consider buying an expensive screen but who also resented how so many would accept the premise that advanced DIY Screens were right up there with their Mfg brethren as far as performance.

Today's crop of advanced DIY Screens hold no bones about being competitive. Yes, there are still limitations, but the gap has closed to just a short skip between most expensive Mfg Screens and DIY versions, and for most every "Standard Matte White or HC Gray", we can look over our shoulders and see them breathless, trying to keep up.

It's a great feeling, made all the more great by being able to share such with so many others.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #176 of 179 Old 07-11-2013, 10:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Sounds great. I believe DIY will be the screen for me. I'll first need to find a place here in Phoenix that has the Sintra / Komatex material. The next step will be to determine which formula to use for the application. I'm sure that room size, screen size, ambient light, projector, throw distance, etc will all play a part in determining that. Here's my setup and what I think I want:

1) Room - a great room, which is a family room connected to a dining area, connected to a kitchen - all one room. It's 14'8" wide for the family room, which expands out to 20' for the dining area and kitchen. The total length is about 45'. Ceiling is 9'.
2) Screen - I want a 100" diagonal 16:9 screen, kind of like a zero edge. I'd like some trim around the edge, kind of like the 4th picture you provided for me in the post above - from Avatar - with the pinkish back light. Anyone know what was used for that edge? Also, I want the bottom of the screen 2' from the floor, so that it will be more involving from the seat on the couch. This means the top of the screen will be 3' from the ceiling.
3) Ambient light - couple of windows on the left side of the room, and further back at the dining area is a sliding glass door. The windows have shutters, which can be adjusted to allow zero to a lot of light. The family room has 4 recessed can lights (65 watt bulbs) - two in the front of the room and two in the rear, all on the same switch. Beyond that, the dining area has a ceiling fan/light fixture, and the kitchen has recessed lights.
4) Projector - this is why I was asking the projector question in my previous post. I think with a JVC or Sony projector, I will need to have a 2' post, so that the projector is 2' or more from the ceiling - mainly because my screen will be lower. That's why I'm thinking an Epson would be a good compromise, because it has more vertical lens shift. I can mount the projector on a 1' post and be good to go. This will be a lot less intrusive to the room and to folks walking into the room. Anyway, that's why I was asking the question up above - how does the 6020 get twice the FL of the 5020 in similar setups?
5) Throw distance. The couch will be about 13' from the screen, and I'm thinking about 11' from the screen for the projector, in order to get the most brightness out of it.

Sorry if this is too much info or the wrong place to post it. If so, please let me know...

Dave

FOR SALE: Wireworld Platinum 6 1M HDMI Cable. Originally $1000, selling for $500 obo. Please PM me, if interested.
thezaks is offline  
post #177 of 179 Old 07-11-2013, 02:57 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,218
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Sorry if this is too much info or the wrong place to post it. If so, please let me know...



It's a fine place, but perhaps after this exchange you might author your own Build Thread and we can continue from there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post

Sounds great. I believe DIY will be the screen for me. I'll first need to find a place here in Phoenix that has the Sintra / Komatex material.

Piedmont Plastics in Phoenix
5720 South 40th St Ste 3 Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone ...... 602.437.1000

Quote:
The next step will be to determine which formula to use for the application. I'm sure that room size, screen size, ambient light, projector, throw distance, etc will all play a part in determining that. Here's my setup and what I think I want:

1) Room - a great room, which is a family room connected to a dining area, connected to a kitchen - all one room. It's 14'8" wide for the family room, which expands out to 20' for the dining area and kitchen. The total length is about 45'. Ceiling is 9'.
2) Screen - I want a 100" diagonal 16:9 screen, kind of like a zero edge. I'd like some trim around the edge, kind of like the 4th picture you provided for me in the post above - from Avatar - with the pinkish back light. Anyone know what was used for that edge? Also, I want the bottom of the screen 2' from the floor, so that it will be more involving from the seat on the couch. This means the top of the screen will be 3' from the ceiling.

Your either gonna laugh, or cry. The edge you see is a small area of unpainted Sintra. The Sintra is mounted directly to the wood using 1- 3/4" Truss Head Screws ** and it's edge overhangs the 2x4 Frame underneath by 1" all around.

]



**




The actual screen area was then taped off.



.......and Sprayed:

Tape Removed after painting:





You'll note the Screws set within the small unpainted border.

I love this shot...



But don't fret, a similar approach with the edges wrapped in ProtoStar Telescope Flocking and you'll have exactly what you want.

And BTW, the PJ used in the above example was a Epson 9350



Quote:
3) Ambient light - couple of windows on the left side of the room, and further back at the dining area is a sliding glass door. The windows have shutters, which can be adjusted to allow zero to a lot of light. The family room has 4 recessed can lights (65 watt bulbs) - two in the front of the room and two in the rear, all on the same switch. Beyond that, the dining area has a ceiling fan/light fixture, and the kitchen has recessed lights.

Oh we got'cher back on all that......

Quote:
4) Projector - this is why I was asking the projector question in my previous post. I think with a JVC or Sony projector, I will need to have a 2' post, so that the projector is 2' or more from the ceiling - mainly because my screen will be lower. That's why I'm thinking an Epson would be a good compromise, because it has more vertical lens shift. I can mount the projector on a 1' post and be good to go. This will be a lot less intrusive to the room and to folks walking into the room. Anyway, that's why I was asking the question up above - how does the 6020 get twice the FL of the 5020 in similar setups?

1st, the 5020/ 6020 either will ace out your situation.
2nd, I think you'll have to direct me to a post of mine where I said that. I don't think it exists. I can remember saying that the 6010 / 6020 can have a 2x increase in Foot lambert between the furthers and closest throw placements. I also recall that the older Epson 8500 had almost 2x the Fls at a given throw distance than the 8350, even with a 400 lumen difference in favor of the 8350. All due to the significant difference in contrast. And...if I made a similar statement regarding the 8350 vs the 5010, that two is possible. But that one ditty? I don't think so.

Now iffin' you do find that mistake and chose not to post it and embarrass me, we be Buds for life. biggrin.gif
Quote:
5) Throw distance. The couch will be about 13' from the screen, and I'm thinking about 11' from the screen for the projector, in order to get the most brightness out of it.

Dave


A truly wise man.

Get that new dedicated Thread posted up! See ya there!

Rubbing 120"s of salt in the wound.






To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #178 of 179 Old 07-11-2013, 04:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Wow - again! Thanks for your help. I'll have to start a new thread, and when I do, I'll drop a line here to let you know where it is.

Thanks,

Dave

FOR SALE: Wireworld Platinum 6 1M HDMI Cable. Originally $1000, selling for $500 obo. Please PM me, if interested.
thezaks is offline  
post #179 of 179 Old 07-15-2013, 01:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 18
You can now find me in the following thread:

Silver Fire Project - fixed or motorized?


Dave

FOR SALE: Wireworld Platinum 6 1M HDMI Cable. Originally $1000, selling for $500 obo. Please PM me, if interested.
thezaks is offline  
Reply DIY Screen Section

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off