CIH or CIW with masking.. help me wrap my brain around this - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 14 Old 06-12-2012, 09:44 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
sonichart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Dundee, IL
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
So i've been reading through quite a few threads and here's what I cannot figure out.

If I have a theater room that is 13 feet wide, then I have two screen sizes to choose from when shopping.

Option 1: 125" x 53" 2.35:1 screen with a 136" diagonal image.

Option 2: 125" x 70" 1.78:1 screen with a 142" diagonal image.

Given a choice of ONLY these two screens I would likely choose option 1. However, doesn't it make sense to go with option 2 and some type of masking system for the top/bottom bars? I've been thinking all along that I would choose the 2nd option and implement carada's horizontal masking system.

I've been searching this forum up and down for someone who is employing the same practice.

What am I missing? If I'm watching 2.35 content, I lower the masks to create a 125" x 53" viewable area (which is the same size I would have if I purchased a 2.35 AR screen). If I'm viewing content in 1.85... I can simply adjust the mask to make it 125 x 66.. and if the content is 1.78 I can just remove the masks?

I apologize for my ignorance on this and hoping to become a little better educated with regard to this topic.
sonichart is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 Old 06-12-2012, 09:58 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
sonichart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Dundee, IL
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
And really what it comes down to for me-- is do you spend the money what fashion?

2.35:1 screen with an A-lens... smaller 16:9 image

or

16:9 screen with Carada Horizontal Masking system

Pretty sure the masking system option will run at least 4K in price,... not sure what the first option would set me back.
sonichart is offline  
post #3 of 14 Old 06-12-2012, 10:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 53
I would base the choice on what it is you watch the most of. If you mostly watch 2.35:1 movies, go with option 1. If you mostly watch sports, TV, etc, choose option 2.

The other factor here would be the "why" of the 2.35:1 aspect ratio. That ratio was chosen to engage your peripheral vision and make you feel like you are part of the action. That only really works if 2.35:1 is the largest content in your home theater. When it's the smallest. you lose that immersive effect. So, if you are a movie lover trying to recreate the immersion that the 2.35:1 aspect ratio was intended to create, go with option 1.
John Schuermann is offline  
post #4 of 14 Old 06-12-2012, 11:56 AM
Senior Member
 
5mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonichart View Post

So i've been reading through quite a few threads and here's what I cannot figure out.
If I have a theater room that is 13 feet wide, then I have two screen sizes to choose from when shopping.
Option 1: 125" x 53" 2.35:1 screen with a 136" diagonal image.
Option 2: 125" x 70" 1.78:1 screen with a 142" diagonal image.
Given a choice of ONLY these two screens I would likely choose option 1. However, doesn't it make sense to go with option 2 and some type of masking system for the top/bottom bars? I've been thinking all along that I would choose the 2nd option and implement carada's horizontal masking system.
I've been searching this forum up and down for someone who is employing the same practice.
What am I missing? If I'm watching 2.35 content, I lower the masks to create a 125" x 53" viewable area (which is the same size I would have if I purchased a 2.35 AR screen). If I'm viewing content in 1.85... I can simply adjust the mask to make it 125 x 66.. and if the content is 1.78 I can just remove the masks?
I apologize for my ignorance on this and hoping to become a little better educated with regard to this topic.

Seating distance is a big factor in whether to go 2.35:1. If your main seating is between 10-13ft then I think option 1 would be perfect (I have the same size screen). Sitting farther back would make option 2 more reasonable.(Or if you have multiple rows to choose from based on content). But then you still have the issue of say HDTV sitcoms being larger than epics like LOTR. And a 2.35:1 screen just looks more "cinematic", even with the lights on. If you have the projector first its not a bad idea to use a wall or makeshift screen and experiment with screen sizes and seating distrances.

Also keep in mind that most people find the side "back bars" watching 16:9 content on a 2.35 screen to be less distracting than 2.35 letterbox bars on a 16:9 screen. Masking becomes less necessary and it's also easier to come up with DIY options.
5mark is offline  
post #5 of 14 Old 06-13-2012, 12:02 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Nobody has asked the question, but an important factor is what projector and screen are you looking at? A 142" diagonal screen is a large screen and will need a bright projector and/or a screen with some gain. If we can help you with the selection process, please contact us. Also are you wanting to do 3D with this setup?

Added
I have owned a constant width system with horizontal masking. I currently own a 2.40 scope screen with lens. Since I use my system for 90% movies, a scope screen made the most sense to me and I am happy with my choice.

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales
Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me: Mike@AVScience.com

Brands we sell: http://avscience.com/brands/

 

Call for B-stock projectors

Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI & many more.
Klipsch, RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Technology, MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech.

AV Science Sales 5 is offline  
post #6 of 14 Old 06-14-2012, 05:06 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
sonichart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Dundee, IL
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Nobody has asked the question, but an important factor is what projector and screen are you looking at? A 142" diagonal screen is a large screen and will need a bright projector and/or a screen with some gain. If we can help you with the selection process, please contact us. Also are you wanting to do 3D with this setup?
Added
I have owned a constant width system with horizontal masking. I currently own a 2.40 scope screen with lens. Since I use my system for 90% movies, a scope screen made the most sense to me and I am happy with my choice.

After doing more reading, it looks as if I will also be getting a scope screen (thinking a 2.37 curved AT screen) and a lens. Aside from Prismasonic it's pretty difficult finding pricing for something like a Panamorph UH480 or anything else really. THe only 2 brands of lenses I'm aware of are the two mentioned. It depends on the room, but I think I can pull off a 140" wide 2.37 screen, if not I'll go 130" wide.

I haven't decided on a projector yet, though if I had to make the purchase today it's a Sony HW30/VPL95 or JVC RS45/55.. but I've received good advice from this forum to have the room completely built and finished before making this purchase. Hopefully I'm making that decision once new projectors have been announced an released.

I figure I will at least attempt to do 3D about 10% of the time as well.
sonichart is offline  
post #7 of 14 Old 06-17-2012, 04:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonichart View Post

After doing more reading, it looks as if I will also be getting a scope screen (thinking a 2.37 curved AT screen) and a lens. Aside from Prismasonic it's pretty difficult finding pricing for something like a Panamorph UH480 or anything else really. THe only 2 brands of lenses I'm aware of are the two mentioned. It depends on the room, but I think I can pull off a 140" wide 2.37 screen, if not I'll go 130" wide.
I haven't decided on a projector yet, though if I had to make the purchase today it's a Sony HW30/VPL95 or JVC RS45/55.. but I've received good advice from this forum to have the room completely built and finished before making this purchase. Hopefully I'm making that decision once new projectors have been announced an released.
I figure I will at least attempt to do 3D about 10% of the time as well.

Curved or straight screen has to do with your throw ratio. If we can help you with selection, shoot us an email when the time comes. 130" to 140" is a large screen.

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales
Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me: Mike@AVScience.com

Brands we sell: http://avscience.com/brands/

 

Call for B-stock projectors

Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI & many more.
Klipsch, RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Technology, MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech.

AV Science Sales 5 is offline  
post #8 of 14 Old 06-17-2012, 03:32 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonichart View Post

After doing more reading, it looks as if I will also be getting a scope screen (thinking a 2.37 curved AT screen) and a lens. Aside from Prismasonic it's pretty difficult finding pricing for something like a Panamorph UH480 or anything else really. The only 2 brands of lenses I'm aware of are the two mentioned. It depends on the room, but I think I can pull off a 140" wide 2.37 screen, if not I'll go 130" wide.
Schneider/Isco is considered the top of the line lens. The two brands are essentially the same lens, different branding. Curved or not has to do with your room conditions and screen material selection as well as your throw ratio. Screen material selection has a lot to do with your room parameters and your projector selection. If you need help, give me a call, I can walk you through it.
GetGray is offline  
post #9 of 14 Old 06-18-2012, 07:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,958
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You will need at least 1500 - 1800 lumens with a 1.0 gain screen. Now you could go half that with a 2.0 gain screen in theory. The issue is as I recall you want an AT screen and the max gain I have seen is 1.3

Next, depending on the screen width and lens you will mont the projector 12 - 20' from the screen depending "short" or "llong" throw.

As far as 1.78 vs. 2.37, I have the latter, 2.37, my viewing is 50-50 movies and sports. The side bars are not to bad the DNP Supernova rejects light pretty well but not as good as masking of course.

With regard to curved or flat well I think if your room is partial or total light controlled room I think flat is fine since the screen is only 10' wide (mine is about 130" wide.

Last I own an ISCO lens from GetGrey and could not be happier.

Mike Miles

ICR [ Sales Consulting and Small Part-Time AV shop, very small...  ]

Process Integration, Inc. [ contract sales consultant ]

Eastern Shore of Maryland

mmiles is offline  
post #10 of 14 Old 06-18-2012, 10:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
pkarmouche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I chose to go with a roughly 2.0:1 AR screen (132" wide). Some people call it CIA (constant image area). Scope movies take up the entire width (small amount of masking on the top and bottom). 16:9 movies take up the entire height (small amount of masking on the sides).

The black bars are quite small. I have a few plans for some type of automatic masking - but have other projects to finish first.

I've read others on the forum who employ replaceable masking strips (attached with velcro or similar) and just put them in place. Some others have built elaborate 4-way masking systems DIY - but this is not for the faint of heart. Yet others simply zoom over a bit and use their projector's internal masking to crop off the edges - and watch everything in the 2.0:1 AR. Purists, of course, argue against this.

What I like about CIA, is that neither AR is "bigger". Scope movies are w-i-d-e-r and 16:9 movies are, well, 16:9. Both are impressive in their own way, and both are immersive. My JVC RS-55 fills the screen in my completely light controlled, dark room, and I find it bright enough running all AR's.

I hope this helps with your decision.

Paul
pkarmouche is offline  
post #11 of 14 Old 06-19-2012, 05:02 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
sonichart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Dundee, IL
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post

You will need at least 1500 - 1800 lumens with a 1.0 gain screen. Now you could go half that with a 2.0 gain screen in theory. The issue is as I recall you want an AT screen and the max gain I have seen is 1.3
Next, depending on the screen width and lens you will mont the projector 12 - 20' from the screen depending "short" or "llong" throw.
As far as 1.78 vs. 2.37, I have the latter, 2.37, my viewing is 50-50 movies and sports. The side bars are not to bad the DNP Supernova rejects light pretty well but not as good as masking of course.
With regard to curved or flat well I think if your room is partial or total light controlled room I think flat is fine since the screen is only 10' wide (mine is about 130" wide.
Last I own an ISCO lens from GetGrey and could not be happier.

Lumens and screen gain is something, admittedly, that I have not put as much thought into as I probably should. My assumption is that with an A-lens you get more brightness and with a projector similar to the RS-55 or VPLVW95ES it would light up a 130" 1.3gain screen without an issue. My throw range will likely max out at 17' ... but can easily make it 16 or 15' if need be.

Is it possible that with the new line of projectors coming out in the fall that we would see a projector with built-in A-lens capability rendering the A-lens obsolete?

GetGrey, I see that you sell the cineslide-- do you also sell A-lens? I'm currently in the process of shopping one.
sonichart is offline  
post #12 of 14 Old 06-19-2012, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,958
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am not a video expert as to the science and design fundamentals but more so equated with the "math" from a configuration perspective.

Let's talk "throw ratio" for a moment. Usually there is a short (pj closer to screen) and long throw (you got it, pj further from screen) options with most projectors. Using 16 feet as your projector location and 11 feet (132 inches) as your screen width in the 1.78 format ( that is the native format of projectors you need 1.35 lens effect or a short throw. This throw distance also affects contrast and lumens.

Using an A - lens will also slightly affect performance but again it is not a major factor.

Lumens required is again basic math to establish a minimum expectation IMHO. Take the square feet of the screen surface and multiply it by the desired screen brightness ( reflection off the screen of the image sorta) you get the lumens. A bright image would be between 24 - 28 ftL (foot lamberts or candles, again get further technical explanations elsewhere ). OK, if a 1.78 format screen is 11 ft wide it is 6.18 ft in height it has a 68 sq ft area x 28ftL ( bright ) that equals 1904 lumens. Then bump it 25 - 35 % because bulbs decline over time and eventually require replacement.

Mike Miles

ICR [ Sales Consulting and Small Part-Time AV shop, very small...  ]

Process Integration, Inc. [ contract sales consultant ]

Eastern Shore of Maryland

mmiles is offline  
post #13 of 14 Old 06-19-2012, 05:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,958
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My bad your throw at 16 ft would be a 1.5 ratio with a 125" wide screen.

Mike Miles

ICR [ Sales Consulting and Small Part-Time AV shop, very small...  ]

Process Integration, Inc. [ contract sales consultant ]

Eastern Shore of Maryland

mmiles is offline  
post #14 of 14 Old 06-19-2012, 06:10 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonichart View Post

Lumens and screen gain is something, admittedly, that I have not put as much thought into as I probably should. My assumption is that with an A-lens you get more brightness and with a projector similar to the RS-55 or VPLVW95ES it would light up a 130" 1.3gain screen without an issue. My throw range will likely max out at 17' ... but can easily make it 16 or 15' if need be.
Is it possible that with the new line of projectors coming out in the fall that we would see a projector with built-in A-lens capability rendering the A-lens obsolete?
TR = distance to screen / Screen height * 0.5625. Can't get it wrong with that formula. Takes widths and diagonals out of the "picture".

re other questions Email me, easier to read on smartphones New forum software makes it too cumbersome to participate via smart phone anymore. scott07
*at* techht.com
GetGray is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

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