Kilz kills... - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 12-31-2006, 03:23 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Brewed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm obviously a newbie to FP. I got a Panny Ax100 about a month ago.

In preparation for its arrival, I painted the screen wall a dark gray (too dark as it turns out) I left a "hole" for the screen which is 88" diag (I hear the sniggling).

Anyhow, 2 coats of Kilz makes for magnificant viewing! I bought a gallon of UPW and was considering Soothing White but found myself asking why.

I suppose my question is "Can the incremental approach" stop at square one?

What am I missing? The picture is beautiful.

Kudos to all that have dedicated time/effort/$$$ to this endeavor.
Brewed is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 12-31-2006, 07:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wbassett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Been all over. Currently living in upperstate NY in the Capital District area.
Posts: 1,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The Ax100 is one helluva projector. That is the one I want to get. It will look good on almost anything, and even better on the right screen.

White will always do well as far as reflecting accurate images.

"Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler." - Albert Einstein
wbassett is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 06:25 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Brewed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the responses. And from two of my "heroes" on this forum, no less. You guys appear tireless in the search for the perfect pic.

My screen wall is "too dark" simply because it appears blacker than the blacks from the PJ. I rectified this somewhat yesterday by reducing the brightness setting on the PJ. This seemed to darken the blacks and provide more detail.

My point is that I learned (the hard way) that it is possible to have the back wall so dark that it reveals a limitation of projection technology (at least at the level of the Panny).

I appreciate the reassurance. Everyone needs some now and then.

But for now, the UPW stays in the can.
Brewed is offline  
post #4 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 06:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Scherrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 1,843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
It's also my experience that the primers provide a much more even coverage, especially for those of us who are deficient in painting skills. As Tiddler said above, with proper light control, any white screen would probably work. It's when you add any amount of ambient light that you may run into problems.

I am torn with my screen. I painted a DIY roll-down screen with a tinted primer, and sometime I feel it is too dark. I had friends over last night for a new years party, and we were watching the Chicago Bears on HD, which looked absolutely fantastic. And when I commented about how I thought the screen was too dark, they showed a scene of the CHicago river, and you could clearly see the lit up buildings in the back ground, and the river looked inky--it was very cool. They looked at me and said, it looks great to me!

Registered U.S. Patent and Trademark Attorney
Steve Scherrer is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 07:30 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,934
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 224
White is always a reference by which to judge other hues by. But what your experiencing is the difference between a static situation (Wall Color) that you always see as a specific shade of "Dark" compared to a dynamic, changing pallet of colors and hues.

Recently, I came across the following short paper on Contrast Ratio facts. It spells out for us all the difference between what IS Black, and what we can see as "Black" (Info provided via the courtesy of Projection Technologies)

Contrast Ratio

* Contrast Ratio is the ratio of the brightness between the whitest and blackest areas of a screen.
* The two most common methods of measuring contrast ratio are:

1. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) test where a checkerboard pattern of 16 black and white rectangles is displayed. The ANSI contrast ratio is the result of dividing the average light output of the white rectangles by the average light output of the black squares.
2. The Full On/Full Off contrast test which measures the ratio of the light output for a white to the light output of an all black (full off) image for the display being tested.

* Full On/Full Off tests yield higher results than an ANSI tests.
* Manufacturers generally quote the Full On/Full off (higher) test results for their products but, mostly do not specify which test was used.
* It is commonly argued that the ANSI test is more indicative of contrast ratio due to its checkerboard pattern being closer to actual viewing conditions.
* The human eye, at any particular instant, can perceive a contrast ratio over a range of 400 to 800:1. The human eye is a dynamic organ however, and can adjust over time (up to 30 minutes) in steady lighting conditions to perceive higher contrast ratios.
* The human eye can detect higher contrast ratios for static images as opposed to moving images.
* Ambient light significantly reduces the ability of display devices to render higher contrast ratios (in the 1,000's).

* A display's contrast ratio does not reflect how well colors or gray tones are rendered.

Conclusions
* If the contrast ratio testing procedures are not specified, one may be comparing contrast ratios from completely different scales.
* Contrast ratios over 800:1 are somewhat meaningless given the performance restrictions of the human eye.
* Ambient lighting wipes out the ability to perceive contrast ratios in the order of 1,000's.
* There is no substitute to viewing a display in its intended lighting conditions.

This all tells me you should most definitely attempt to get as consistently as high a level of blacks in your viewing experience as you can, so as to become used to seeing that level.

A Dark room will never distract from getting such "Blacks' only let you see them as Blacker than they really are. You made a "Right" choice, so enjoy!

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Scherrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 1,843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Interesting. Thanks, MMan.

Registered U.S. Patent and Trademark Attorney
Steve Scherrer is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 12:39 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Brewed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

White is always a reference by which to judge other hues by. But what your experiencing is the difference between a static situation (Wall Color) that you always see as a specific shade of "Dark" compared to a dynamic, changing pallet of colors and hues.

Recently, I came across the following short paper on Contrast Ratio facts. It spells out for us all the difference between what IS Black, and what we can see as "Black" (Info provided via the courtesy of Projection Technologies)

Contrast Ratio

* Contrast Ratio is the ratio of the brightness between the whitest and blackest areas of a screen.
* The two most common methods of measuring contrast ratio are:

1. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) test where a checkerboard pattern of 16 black and white rectangles is displayed. The ANSI contrast ratio is the result of dividing the average light output of the white rectangles by the average light output of the black squares.
2. The Full On/Full Off contrast test which measures the ratio of the light output for a white to the light output of an all black (full off) image for the display being tested.

* Full On/Full Off tests yield higher results than an ANSI tests.
* Manufacturers generally quote the Full On/Full off (higher) test results for their products but, mostly do not specify which test was used.
* It is commonly argued that the ANSI test is more indicative of contrast ratio due to its checkerboard pattern being closer to actual viewing conditions.
* The human eye, at any particular instant, can perceive a contrast ratio over a range of 400 to 800:1. The human eye is a dynamic organ however, and can adjust over time (up to 30 minutes) in steady lighting conditions to perceive higher contrast ratios.
* The human eye can detect higher contrast ratios for static images as opposed to moving images.
* Ambient light significantly reduces the ability of display devices to render higher contrast ratios (in the 1,000's).

* A display's contrast ratio does not reflect how well colors or gray tones are rendered.

Conclusions
* If the contrast ratio testing procedures are not specified, one may be comparing contrast ratios from completely different scales.
* Contrast ratios over 800:1 are somewhat meaningless given the performance restrictions of the human eye.
* Ambient lighting wipes out the ability to perceive contrast ratios in the order of 1,000's.
* There is no substitute to viewing a display in its intended lighting conditions.

This all tells me you should most definitely attempt to get as consistently as high a level of blacks in your viewing experience as you can, so as to become used to seeing that level.

A Dark room will never distract from getting such "Blacks' only let you see them as Blacker than they really are. You made a "Right" choice, so enjoy!

Wonderful insight MississippiMan. So it appears that PJ's claiming huge contrast ratios are hype unless one has the perfect room. Very interesting. I'm quickly learning how important ambient light can be. I keep my beer in a coozie. If I wake up and the floor is in the nearfield, I go to bed.

Too much fun.
Brewed is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 12:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bruce can's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kamloops BC. Canada
Posts: 1,493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


White is always a reference by which to judge other hues by. But what your experiencing is the difference between a static situation (Wall Color) that you always see as a specific shade of "Dark" compared to a dynamic, changing pallet of colors and hues.

Recently, I came across the following short paper on Contrast Ratio facts. It spells out for us all the difference between what IS Black, and what we can see as "Black" (Info provided via the courtesy of Projection Technologies)

Contrast Ratio

* Contrast Ratio is the ratio of the brightness between the whitest and blackest areas of a screen.
* The two most common methods of measuring contrast ratio are:

1. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) test where a checkerboard pattern of 16 black and white rectangles is displayed. The ANSI contrast ratio is the result of dividing the average light output of the white rectangles by the average light output of the black squares.
2. The Full On/Full Off contrast test which measures the ratio of the light output for a white to the light output of an all black (full off) image for the display being tested.

* Full On/Full Off tests yield higher results than an ANSI tests.
* Manufacturers generally quote the Full On/Full off (higher) test results for their products but, mostly do not specify which test was used.
* It is commonly argued that the ANSI test is more indicative of contrast ratio due to its checkerboard pattern being closer to actual viewing conditions.
* The human eye, at any particular instant, can perceive a contrast ratio over a range of 400 to 800:1. The human eye is a dynamic organ however, and can adjust over time (up to 30 minutes) in steady lighting conditions to perceive higher contrast ratios.
* The human eye can detect higher contrast ratios for static images as opposed to moving images.
* Ambient light significantly reduces the ability of display devices to render higher contrast ratios (in the 1,000's).

* A display's contrast ratio does not reflect how well colors or gray tones are rendered.

Conclusions
* If the contrast ratio testing procedures are not specified, one may be comparing contrast ratios from completely different scales.
* Contrast ratios over 800:1 are somewhat meaningless given the performance restrictions of the human eye.
* Ambient lighting wipes out the ability to perceive contrast ratios in the order of 1,000's.
* There is no substitute to viewing a display in its intended lighting conditions.

This all tells me you should most definitely attempt to get as consistently as high a level of blacks in your viewing experience as you can, so as to become used to seeing that level.

A Dark room will never distract from getting such "Blacks' only let you see them as Blacker than they really are. You made a "Right" choice, so enjoy!


MM where did you get your info ?


That is one of the most misleading post describing Contrast I have seen in a while .

Can you link where all that was said in one document, or was a lot of your post your own conclusions?






Bruce .
bruce can is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 01:24 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,934
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce can View Post

MM where did you get your info ?


That is one of the most misleading post describing Contrast I have seen in a while .

Can you link where all that was said in one document, or was a lot of your post your own conclusions?

Bruce .

Awww Bruce,

I gave reference as to where the info came from. You might not agree with what was offered, but why would you go so far as to label it misleading, when it comes from those who business is rooted in knowing such facts, not painting stuff like we both do? And suggesting that "I" edited in my conclusions? I'm shocked!! Nope, I offered it up separate, right there....plain as day.

Happy New Year, Bruce!
http://www.presentationtek.com/2006/...ets-uncovered/

It's info I found interesting, and much of it has been discussed and held up as known and true fact on this very Forum, and by some whose interest was to discredit DIY efforts and their results. It all relates back to the validity of Screenies, ya know. Remember what was thrown about so often, that the CR seen in Screenies did not represent what the eye actually sees in person.

The stated facts above would seem to lend credence to that argument, at least the part where the Camera is concerned. But in a good "light" because the camera "might" be actually capturing CR levels we cannot perceive unless they are presented in "Static" form. (ie: Screen Shots) I

It also makes a case for the Contrast levels specs, and as actually seen on a Display to be as high as possible, so that one can get used to perceiving such. Also, controlled lighting environs will allow for optimal viewing of any degree of Contrast within an image.

I see what was stated as being factual, but overly disallowing the varied difference in People, and their ability to recognize differences when accustomed to them being of a certain level/property. All the different points between the lowest level of ambient light and the highest levels all place their own demands on the Contrast viewing situation. Some "Solutions" might handle a broad swath of various levels of AL, others working best within a certain confine of Hue & PJ.

I've seen, as I know you have as well, just how different the appearance of Contrast can be from one DIY application as compared to another. The Article points out that initially, the Human eye lags behind, but can adjust in a relatively short time to process higher CR levels. Certainly, that applies to what we are all looking to achieve here. Whites. Colors. Blacker 'Blacks'.

Brewed has a Panny AX100u. It has great CR specs and plenty of extra lumens. With a CR enhancing surface suited to his needs, he can assure himself of "perceiving" the very best Black levels he can. Gosh! He has a Dark Gray room, a PJ with high CR specs, Light Control, and a White primed wall. He wants the blacks within his projected image to look as dark as or darker than his walls do with the lights off/barely on.

Short of over utilizing his PJs BLE enhancement features to the point of crushing everything into oblivion, what would you suggest he do?

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 01:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bruce can's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kamloops BC. Canada
Posts: 1,493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Awww Bruce,

I gave reference as to where the info came from. You might not agree with what was offered, but why would you go so far as to label it misleading, when it comes from those who business is rooted in knowing such facts, not painting stuff like we both do? And suggesting that "I" edited in my conclusions? I'm shocked!! Nope, I offered it up separate, right there....plain as day.

Happy New Year, Bruce!
http://www.presentationtek.com/2006...rets-uncovered/

It's info I found interesting, and much of it has been discussed and held up asknown and true fact on this very Forum, and by some whose interest was to discredit DIY efforts and their results. It all relates back to the validity of Screenies, ya know. Remember what was thrown about so often, that the CR seen in Screenies did not represent what the eye actually sees in person.

The stated facts above would seem to lend credence to that argument, at least the part where the Camera is concerned. But in a good "light" because the camera "might" be actually capturing CR levels we cannot perceive unless they are presented in "Static" form. (ie: Screen Shots) I

It also makes a case for the Contrast levels specs, and as actually seen on a Display to be as high as possible, so that one can get used to perceiving such. Also, controlled lighting environs will allow for optimal viewing of any degree of Contrast within an image.

I see what was stated as being factual, but overly disallowing the varied difference in People, and their ability to recognize differences when accustomed to them being of a certain level/property. All the different points between the lowest level of ambient light and the highest levels all place their own demands on the Contrast viewing situation. Some "Solutions" might handle a broad swath of various levels of AL, others working best within a certain confine of Hue & PJ.

I've seen, as I know you have as well, just how different the appearance of Contrast can be from one DIY application as compared to another. The Article points out that initially, the Human eye lags behind, but can adjust in a relatively short time to process higher CR levels. Certainly, that applies to what we are all looking to achieve here. Whites. Colors. Blacker 'Blacks'.

Brewed has a Panny AX100u. It has great CR specs and plenty of extra lumens. With a CR enhancing surface suited to his needs, he can assure himself of "perceiving" the very best Black levels he can. Gosh! He has a Dark Gray room, a PJ with high CR specs, Light Control, and a White primed wall. He wants the blacks within his projected image to look as dark as or darker than his walls do with the lights off/barely on.

Short of over utilizing his PJs BLE enhancement features to the point of crushing everything into oblivion, what would you suggest he do?



Quote:


Awww Bruce,

I gave reference as to where the info came from.

MM I never saw your reference THAT is why I asked for some form of reference .

You hadonly just mentioned you had read some short papers, leading sounding like they were some test results from someone doing research on Contrast.

Quote:


It's info I found interesting, and much of it has been discussed and held up as known and true fact on this very Forum, and by some whose interest was to discredit DIY efforts and their results. It all relates back to the validity of Screenies, ya know. Remember what was thrown about so often, that the CR seen in Screenies did not represent what the eye actually sees in person.

MM it is interesting info but it is not held up as known and true .
Most of what this guy puts out is only partial info .

MM ON these short papers as you call them, do you notice that no follow up questions have been answered especially question 4 .

I would not use that site as any basis on info on contrast period .

It lists the Author as Ken Dory maybe we can have him here as a guest speaker explaining Contrast Ratio to the diy crowd . (I will try to Contact him and see what he says )


Quote:


A Dark room will never distract from getting such "Blacks' only let you see them as Blacker than they really are. You made a "Right" choice, so enjoy!

MM what does this mean ?

Bruce

PS
HAPPY NEW YEAR as well MM
bruce can is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 01-01-2007, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bruce can's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kamloops BC. Canada
Posts: 1,493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If you want to find more tech quides look just under the contrast article to link to his other tech articles .
http://www.presentationtek.com/2006...rets-uncovered/

The Connectors article and the screen article really cought my eye.


Since this the diy screen forum I thought we should look at some screens info.


This is from the website quoted about the one where we get our contrast lesson from.

Here is an article about screens which is about as accurate as his contrast article was .

http://www.presentationtek.com/?p=4


PLEASE READ the screen tech article


MM do you know this guy from this site at all ??



You just might learn that It is just as important to avoid cold spotting as well as hotspotting when choosing your screen


MM I also do not agree with even one of his statements about screens, Do you ?



Bruce
bruce can is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 01-02-2007, 10:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Person99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Flower Mound, TX
Posts: 5,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Conclusions

* Contrast ratios over 800:1 are somewhat meaningless given the performance restrictions of the human eye.

You have misinterpreted the information. Notice that they said, "The human eye, at any particular instant, can perceive a contrast ratio over a range of 400 to 800:1"

An instant is a very very small amount of time. Basically, it is true that intrascene, you cannot perceiver very high CR because of the way the iris works, etc.

But, you can certainly perceive the difference sequentially. This is why so many cannot give up CRTs. The sequential contrast of digitals is pathetic.

To test this, just grab your trusty digital PJ with a sequential contrast of 3000:1 and put it in a room with a CRT PJ (which will be doing anywhere between 15,000:1 all the way up to about 30,000:1). Now, the test get a test pattern or scene from a movie that is fairly bright that is followed by a fade to black for a few seconds. You will for sure notice the difference between the black screen on the 3000:1 digital and the 20,000:1 CRT! If it took more then a couple seconds for your eye to adjust, both black screens would look the same--but they don't.

The 800:1 is an instantanious range withing the total human range of well beyond even 100,000:1.

Dave
Person99 is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 01-03-2007, 05:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewed View Post

I'm obviously a newbie to FP. I got a Panny Ax100 about a month ago.

In preparation for its arrival, I painted the screen wall a dark gray (too dark as it turns out) I left a "hole" for the screen which is 88" diag (I hear the sniggling).

Anyhow, 2 coats of Kilz makes for magnificant viewing! I bought a gallon of UPW and was considering Soothing White but found myself asking why.

I suppose my question is "Can the incremental approach" stop at square one?

What am I missing? The picture is beautiful.

Kudos to all that have dedicated time/effort/$$$ to this endeavor.

Brewed

First off yes to your question, Can an incremental solution end after one step?

But in your case I think the answer is maybe. There is a great deal to be considered when designing your screen using this approach, but the most important factor is when will you be satisfied. In your first post you are very happy with the results of just the kilz primer as a screen surface and by your next post you have noticed that the blacks don't look as dark in comparison as the dark wall behind.

I only bring this up because we have all been there and had these same thoughts and that's what spurs us on to trying the next little tweak etc. etc etc.

You don't want to lighten the wall behind the screen in a attempt to trick your eyes to thinking blacks are darker. That wont work. My back wall is the flattest of flat blacks and IMO the darker that wall the better.

You are at a cross roads of sorts. You can stop now and say this white primer wall is performing in the 90 to 95% range of the best I will most likely see. Now I pulled them numbers out of the air but after spending a year thinking about this off and on I really think they are pretty accurate numbers. Or you can continue and get another 5 to 7% improvement.

In the old day before projectors where at the state of the art they are today you might have been at 70 to 80% of what you could be seeing as best. Some people are not bothered by not having that real dark image CR and as long as colors pop and whites are bright they are happy campers. Viewing sports etc wont improve all that much from this point on IMO.

The ambient light issue and dark movies is where you can still gain some ground. And they pertain as much with your room design, lighting and room paint colors as they do your screen. But you have the opportunity with a fairly bright projector and a smaller screen size to really make improvements in two ways. The first being picking up that 5 to 7% and secondly making a screen that is more ambient light friendly.

I have a feeling painting your whole room black isn't going to happen. And I don't know if you have a desire to watch some with some lights on. My goal has always been to get to a point of being able to view in a more normal living room lighting condition when needed and then be able to control that light to go darker for the real wow factor viewing.

There is much to read about gray screens and the perceived CR they provide in ambient light. Below in my signature link are my complete thoughts on this.

The last half dozen posts have been informative but I don't think they have addressed your question. Should I stop now or go on?


Bud

bud16415 is online now  
post #14 of 16 Old 01-04-2007, 05:09 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Brewed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
bud16415,

Thanks for your extremely informative post. I'm pressed for time and intend to do more homework before I respond.

I've noticed that the DIY section thread moves much more slowly (a good thing) than the Display threads.

And yes, I was going to lighten my wall and now know that it was a bad idea.

UPW is still in the can........-
Brewed is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 01-05-2007, 05:13 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,934
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 224
In response to those who feel I misinterpreted the info posted.

I presented the article as published, and the quote attributed to me by Person is directly from that article.

The ONLY words that can be attributed to me are:

"This all tells me you should most definitely attempt to get as consistently as high a level of blacks in your viewing experience as you can, so as to become used to seeing that level.

A Dark room will never distract from getting such "Blacks' only let you see them as Blacker than they really are. You made a "Right" choice, so enjoy! "


The issue of contrast is a prickly pear, and something CRT owners like to throw at Digital PJ owners like a rock filled snowball. And it seems that as Digital projection gets better, some CRT advocates get even more desperate to adjudge Digital as being far more deficient than it is. Well, digital projection technology it rapidly approaching the point where there will be NO divisional line between quality in any aspect. JVC's newest "yet to be released" DLA-SR1 (-$5500.00 msrp) sports 15000:1 CR without ANY Iris or BLE enhancement. At that level, the "Eyes" have it. All.

I know full well that the eye can process far more CR than 800:1, but I also know and agree with what was written that it cannot do so nearly as quickly without a reference. Black Trim is advantageous, but a darkened surrounding is even more so. If the room's lighting level exceeds a certain point, any such adjustment will be virtually impossible to ascertain if the display/screen combo cannot consistently produce CR levels well above that 800:1 point

CR enhancement oriented DIY paints work to "restore" black levels by deepening the CR levels of reflected light. Additional enhancements/ or compensation as often is the case, are possible as well. But the combination of higher lumens AND increased CR levels at PJ AND Screen is necessary to really deliver truly noticeable improvements at all points.

This is of course why CRTs are worthless in any degree of ambient light, despite their most excellent CR specifications. Give 'em another 1000 lumens, and a CR enhancing screen, and they too could be far more desirable.

But alas, they are in fact a dying breed of Dinosaur due to size, cost, and service considerations (...at least to mainstream consumers, if not PJ heads...) so it is not valid to use them as a comparison, excepting to show the gains Digital Projection has/is making against them. And "Smoking Gun" PJs like the newest JVC stand to be the "KT" event that can/will bring about their eventual extinction.

Brewed,

IMO, a simple solution with the panny is to control lighting, paint the walls a shade of some decent color whose hue falls 1/2 way between White and the darkest shade of such available. Use a "Flat" pant, not Eggshell or Satin. And paint that wall with either a simple neutral Grey, or a 'slightly advanced' DIY mix that will boost the panny's CR without crushing colors, whites, or attentating the reflecive level enough to notice.

Bud,

Unless Brewed pant job is perfect, you are not considering that a hefty percentage of improvement can be had via proper painting technique. Also, Kilz-2 is NOT a good surface, just a 'white " one, and something that someone can "make do" with if they are pressed for either time.skill, or money. It has sparklies, it is far from being durable as is, and does in fact distract from a PJ's ability to render consistantly higher levels of CR across the entire color spectrum. The panny comes close, but it cannot do it all. Your percentages of the initial quality obtained are too high IMO, and the resulting increase of quality obtainable through the right projection surface can be, and is more than 5-7% The use of such percentages to convey such a dubious point, especially to a Nubee is misleading, and can serve to make them make decisions that are less than desirable as far as obtaining the best results.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #16 of 16 Old 01-05-2007, 06:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Bud,

Unless Brewed pant job is perfect, you are not considering that a hefty percentage of improvement can be had via proper painting technique. Also, Kilz-2 is NOT a good surface, just a 'white " one, and something that someone can "make do" with if they are pressed for either time.skill, or money. It has sparklies, it is far from being durable as is, and does in fact distract from a PJ's ability to render consistantly higher levels of CR across the entire color spectrum. The panny comes close, but it cannot do it all. Your percentages of the initial quality obtained are too high IMO, and the resulting increase of quality obtainable through the right projection surface can be, and is more than 5-7% The use of such percentages to convey such a dubious point, especially to a Nubee is misleading, and can serve to make them make decisions that are less than desirable as far as obtaining the best results.

MM
I did preface my statement with I drew the numbers out of thin air, ( if not a lower part of the anatomy) and you could most likely be right. I was going by the fact that his panny has been widely acclaimed to show great images on BOC and white walls in quite a few threads here, combining that with it's published specs as compared to my meager business projector.

Your knowledge of the different projectors out there (thru your work) far surpasses anyone that posts here I believe. So of course I would default to what you think in regards to the Ax100's abilities off a white primed wall. So what would your guess be of PQ improvements Brewed could expect to see? 20 to 30% ? 10 to 20?

There is a point of diminishing returns and I didn't want to give Brewed the idea he should not venture down the road of improvement. By his own opening statement he said his picture was beautiful, so I assumed he was pretty happy with the Kilz.

In my own case I first started with a white bed sheet and other than the wrinkles I was astounded with the PQ. I then ironed it and was more astounded and then weighted the bottom and was ready to say done. My guess now is I was about at 90% of where I am now.

We do agree if he has some ambient light issues, wall colors etc those will add to his PQ along with some amount of improvement in the perceived dark end CR. Maybe neutral gray or white in a flat finish are in order, maybe even a little poly added. Or he might catch the DIY bug along the way and want to go beyond as some of us have.


Bud

bud16415 is online now  
Reply DIY Screen Section

User Tag List

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