2.35 Screen Size Advice - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-01-2012, 10:28 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Ok, so I love this site and have been scrounging for advice and tips about home theaters. I'm doing the final planning for my theater room before I start framing the room and am stuck on how big my screen should/could be. I have a space in my basement that is 18' W x 20' L that I can use. Now, looking around at some screen options, I am thinking about an Elite ezFrame Fixed Acoustically Transparent 2.35 screen because they have good reviews and are well priced. They make those 2.35s in a 125", 138" and 158" diagonal size (or at least the sizes I'm looking at). I've looked around for screen size tips and I am just stuck on if the 158" is just too big and if it is possible with the projectors I'm looking at... Looks like the 138" screen would work fine (I could be wrong on that as well...). The projectors I'm considering are the JVC DLA-RS45U, JVC DLA-X30BU, or the Panasonic PT-AE7000 that do a 2.35 scope with the lens memory (will possibly consider an actual 2.35 lens in the future but not now).

Here is an aerial view of the layout at the moment with a 158" screen on the viewing wall:



Couple considerations/reasons for my chosen layout:
  • Viewing wall already exists at 18'. Moving it back isn't a very feasible option as it is load bearing, HVAC unit is located in back left corning on the opposing wall and the HVAC plenum is running along the top wall entirely.
  • Adjacent family room area is big enough already so I'm not concerned with the 18' width 'eating' up that space by a couple of feet.
  • Current layout has 11 seats and I would like to maximize my seating with theater loungers. I could make the room less wide and do less seating which would then definitely 'force' me to not consider the 158" screen but like the seating count/layout as it is.
  • Will have two rows of seating that would put the first row around 14 foot back and the second row about 19 foot back.
  • The majority of my viewing will be movies and the rest sports in 16:9. The 158" 2.35 screen can fit a 126" diagonal 16:9 screen and the 138" can fit a 110" 16:9 diagonal screen, both of which I will fine with.
  • Room will have no ambient light, no windows and all lighting will be controlled and thus dark when viewing.
  • Components will be on a rack in the utility room out of sight.
  • Will put in a fiber optic star field ceiling in with a soffit running around the outside border of the room except on the screen wall as I don't have the room height for that. I want to have the projector mounted as far back in the room as possible out of the star field ceilling or within it's own little cabinet in the soffit that will put it 18' to 20' back.
  • 11.2 speaker setup will be recessed within or behind walls, soffit or columns.

With all that:
  1. Will the front row be overwhelmed with a 158" diagonal 2.35 screen (or even the 138") and have to be scrolling their heads back and forth to view and get eye strain?
  2. I've used the projectorcentral.com calculator about positioning the above mentioned projectors back the 18' to 20' foot and while the 158"/138" screens do fall within the range of possible 2.35 screen sizes it "recommends a higher brightness" projector? Will these just not work with getting a good bright and clear picture?

Anyone that has such 2.35 screen sizes or experience with such, what is your room layout/seating distance? Please share any experience, tips, advice, and comments (positive or negative)! smile.gif
rmaddog is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-01-2012, 10:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 173 Post(s)
Liked: 156
I think the biggest problem you'll run into is lighting a screen that size. Looks like that screen is spec'd at unity gain (1.0), so at 73 square feet for the 158" (I'm assuming width), for 16ftL, that's about 1200 Lumens. And that's real Lumens, not marketing Lumens and you have to consider dimming (though really if you start at 16ftL, you'd probably be fine even with dimming I'd guess). I don't think any of the projectors you listed can do 1200 Lumens.

As far as the size goes, for a 158" wide (67" high), that's the front row would be just inside 3 picture heights, so that shouldn't be too big (and you've always got the back row if you prefer it a bit smaller).

But it's really going to come back to lighting it, which is the troublesome part.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
Old 08-01-2012, 11:05 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Sorry, the 158" is the diagonal so it would be 62.1 sq. ft for that screen. Here the dimensions for the screens I'm looking at.



How are you determining how many Lumens necessary for screen size/distance?
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-01-2012, 11:25 AM
Senior Member
 
willscam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a 140" wide x 58.5" high 2.40 aspect 1.0 gain AT screen, with 1st row at 10.5 ft and second row at 16.5ft. So, my diagonal measurement is around 151.5" and I wouldn't want to go any bigger. I use a JVC X70 (calibrated) on high lamp mode. It's bright enough in a light controlled room, but a scope image is almost overwhelming in the front row - but I kind of like it that way. smile.gif I tend to sit pretty close at movie theaters.

You have an awesome space for a theater. I like the plan for the 11.2 surround system. I did the same! With your setup, I think I'd go with the 138" diagonal (~127" wide) screen and consider moving your seating forward a foot or two to get that back row seating off the back wall. There will be acoustic issues having your head inches from the back wall. Viewing the 138" screen from 12 to 13 ft with a second row at 17 to 18 ft should be immersive. With the 138" screen you'll have a little more flexibility in your seating and you should be able to find good locations that maximize visual immersion and avoid acoustic nulls, etc.

Another consideration would be to get the projector first, project at different sizes on the wall, then decide what size is most suitable. That's what I did, and we decided to go with a larger screen size than I had initially planned for. I'll probably need to replace my bulb every couple of years to maintain satisfactory brightness. 3D is a no go with my screen size and low gain. So that may also be a consideration. Better 3D brightness on a smaller screen. Good Luck!

"Trying is the first step towards failure" - Homer Simpson

 

willscam is offline  
Old 08-02-2012, 08:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jautor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,308
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 323 Post(s)
Liked: 379
I don't think your seating is shown to proper scale... Grabbing dimensions for my Berklines, your back row is about 16' wide, leaving only 1' on each side. Double check all those measurements! My 16' room fits a IOIOOIOI configuration with barely enough width for an 18" aisle on each side. You'll also need at least 5.5', probably 6' or more, between rows to get proper reclining without hitting the chairs in front. Especially if you get that many seats across, all the middle folks will be trapped if others are reclining. A 5' depth is certainly not enough...

Echoing willscam's comment, you should definitely consider pulling the rows forward a few feet to get the back row away from the rear wall (and the surround speakers).

As for screen size, for example, my front row is at 10', middle row at 15.5', with a 136" diagonal 2.35 screen. I wouldn't go any bigger for my dimensions. As willscam said, in the front row, it's *almost* overwhelming. I prefer sitting in my middle row, but many folks prefer the front row, too!


Jeff

Rock Creek Theater -- CIH, Panamorph, Martin Logan, SVS PB2000, Carada Masquerade, Grafik Eye, Bar table, Green Glue, JVC RS50 
Theater build photos: http://photobucket.com/autor-ht
jautor is offline  
Old 08-02-2012, 11:00 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Wilscam, many thanks for the advice. I recall coming across your theater thread a couple months ago but missed subscribing to it (am now...). Checked it out from what I have missed and you have created a really nice setup. Love that front acoustic wall. cool.gif I didn't really consider being to close to the back wall in relation to the rear speakers and will have to take that into consideration when building my riser so I can get the optimum seating setup going (both visually and acoustically).

The larger screen (145" wide - 158" diagonal) I'm considering is pretty close to yours, 5" wider, but with my seating potentially being back a few feet more you still would suggest the 126" wide screen (138 diagonal)? So if you did yours again would you consider going slightly smaller, considering your first row? Looking at the Screen Excellence you have, I realize that the next size down is 130" wide but in your opinion if you could get that or somewhere in between would you size down slightly or keep the 140" for your first row?
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-02-2012, 11:16 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
stanger89, I didn't consider dimming either. Looking around, looks like some PJs can loose up to 50% of light after 1000 hours or so. frown.gif And with trying to get in the 16 ftL - 20 ftL range, that is around 975 - 1220 Lumens for the larger 145" wide screen (before dimming). Think I will try to go and try to view some of these in person, particularly with the JVCs only being rated around 1200 Lumens (I realize Lumens aren't everything) but with the size I am thinking about, it will definitely think it will make a difference. There are some home theater shops around my area, one that is a JVC dealer so i will see what they have going.
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-03-2012, 12:38 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 668 Post(s)
Liked: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Sorry, the 158" is the diagonal so it would be 62.1 sq. ft for that screen. Here the dimensions for the screens I'm looking at.

How are you determining how many Lumens necessary for screen size/distance?

Without a lens you will be projecting a 16:9 image that is 145" wide (158" diagonal). That means the effective area of your screen is 145" x 81.5" = 82sf. An RS45 at 900 lumens (short throw) onto a 1.0 gain 158" diagonal 2.35 screen is only going to give you 11 Foot Lamberts (high lamp mode) with a new lamp. In other words, this is too much screen for that projector. Also don't be surprised if the actual gain of the screen is less than 1.0.

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, Falcon, DNP & more.
RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Tech., MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech, Denon, Marantz & Yamaha .
AV Science Sales 5 is offline  
Old 08-05-2012, 11:17 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Without a lens you will be projecting a 16:9 image that is 145" wide (158" diagonal). That means the effective area of your screen is 145" x 81.5" = 82sf. An RS45 at 900 lumens (short throw) onto a 1.0 gain 158" diagonal 2.35 screen is only going to give you 11 Foot Lamberts (high lamp mode) with a new lamp. In other words, this is too much screen for that projector. Also don't be surprised if the actual gain of the screen is less than 1.0.

Mike,

So I guess I don't understand how the the AE7000 or RS45 projects the 2.35 image... So when determining the Lumen / ftL needed for a 2.35 screen image with a projector that doesn't use a cinemascope lens, I still need to calculate the screen area using a 16:9 image based on the width of the 2.35 screen?
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-06-2012, 12:08 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jautor View Post

I don't think your seating is shown to proper scale... Grabbing dimensions for my Berklines, your back row is about 16' wide, leaving only 1' on each side. Double check all those measurements! My 16' room fits a IOIOOIOI configuration with barely enough width for an 18" aisle on each side. You'll also need at least 5.5', probably 6' or more, between rows to get proper reclining without hitting the chairs in front. Especially if you get that many seats across, all the middle folks will be trapped if others are reclining. A 5' depth is certainly not enough...
Echoing willscam's comment, you should definitely consider pulling the rows forward a few feet to get the back row away from the rear wall (and the surround speakers).
As for screen size, for example, my front row is at 10', middle row at 15.5', with a 136" diagonal 2.35 screen. I wouldn't go any bigger for my dimensions. As willscam said, in the front row, it's *almost* overwhelming. I prefer sitting in my middle row, but many folks prefer the front row, too!
Jeff

Jeff,

Thanks for the info. I checked out your theater and it looks pretty awesome. You have a similiar sized theater as what I will have and it helps out a lot to see what you have done and I am going to go through your thread to see your tips and lessons learned. My diagram is to scale and my measurements are correct as it is laid out but how functional it is, well that may be another story. I'm not sure how big your Berkline seats are but the seats I'm looking at are Palliser Stereos which for a double arm, |O|, is 34" wide, a single arm, O| or |O, is 28" wide and a seat with no arms, O, is 23" wide, so my back row of |OO|O|O|OO| should be 163". My room should end up being approximately 17' 4.5" (so 208.5") leaving 45" total width on the back row after the seats, so just under 2 feet on each side which is shown. The steps I have going up to the platform are 32" wide a piece plus the 135" wide first row layout, |OO|O|OO|, which gives me about 4" or so between the edge of the step and the sides of the seats. My riser platform is also 5' 8" deep which I think should give enough depth but the Palliser site doesn't give any length dimensions of a fully reclined seat so I could be wrong on that. Looks like with what you and willscam have shared and what Mike from AVS has recently mentioned, the 145" 2.35 screen would be out of the question (mainly due to not a powerful enough projector w/o a lens) so I will probably be looking at the 127" wide 2.35 screen or something similar to that size from another brand and see about adjusting the depth of the seating layout.
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-06-2012, 01:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RapalloAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 1,882
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 56
I'm using a 140" scope AT screen with three rows of seating (four seats per row) The back row is approx 6M from the screen. I have enough lumen's with the JVC RS65 and the room is painted with very dark colours. Ive now decided to increase the image size with a replacement 142" scope screen, it will be fine to do so.
RapalloAV is online now  
Old 08-06-2012, 01:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jautor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,308
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 323 Post(s)
Liked: 379
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Thanks for the info. I checked out your theater and it looks pretty awesome. You have a similiar sized theater as what I will have and it helps out a lot to see what you have done and I am going to go through your thread to see your tips and lessons learned.

Thanks!
Quote:
My diagram is to scale and my measurements are correct as it is laid out but how functional it is, well that may be another story. I'm not sure how big your Berkline seats are but the seats I'm looking at are Palliser Stereos which for a double arm, |O|, is 34" wide, a single arm, O| or |O, is 28" wide and a seat with no arms, O, is 23" wide, so my back row of |OO|O|O|OO| should be 163". My room should end up being approximately 17' 4.5" (so 208.5") leaving 45" total width on the back row after the seats, so just under 2 feet on each side which is shown.

Ok, good - just checking because my Berklines aren't "huge", but certainly wouldn't have fit into that configuration... A 23" seat is narrow for a recliner, but I'll assume your math works from there! biggrin.gif I'd really recommend sitting in chairs if at all possible before purchasing, or at least getting some experts/users to comment on them (Roman would be the guy to ask).
Quote:
My riser platform is also 5' 8" deep which I think should give enough depth but the Palliser site doesn't give any length dimensions of a fully reclined seat so I could be wrong on that.

Well, it might fit the seat, but the human extending over the edge will be the same. smile.gif Having some room in front of the reclined position is more important the more seats in the row - folks can't get out of my middle seats if the outer ones are reclined - but there's only one seat max from the middle to the aisle. Since you've got room, I'd recommend making that riser 6' or more (and pull the back row away from the wall 1-2').


Jeff

Rock Creek Theater -- CIH, Panamorph, Martin Logan, SVS PB2000, Carada Masquerade, Grafik Eye, Bar table, Green Glue, JVC RS50 
Theater build photos: http://photobucket.com/autor-ht
jautor is offline  
Old 08-06-2012, 04:27 PM
Senior Member
 
willscam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Wilscam, many thanks for the advice. I recall coming across your theater thread a couple months ago but missed subscribing to it (am now...). Checked it out from what I have missed and you have created a really nice setup. Love that front acoustic wall. cool.gif I didn't really consider being to close to the back wall in relation to the rear speakers and will have to take that into consideration when building my riser so I can get the optimum seating setup going (both visually and acoustically).
The larger screen (145" wide - 158" diagonal) I'm considering is pretty close to yours, 5" wider, but with my seating potentially being back a few feet more you still would suggest the 126" wide screen (138 diagonal)? So if you did yours again would you consider going slightly smaller, considering your first row? Looking at the Screen Excellence you have, I realize that the next size down is 130" wide but in your opinion if you could get that or somewhere in between would you size down slightly or keep the 140" for your first row?

I'm happy with my screen size. The front row is great for 16:9 movies and the back row is great for 2.35 movies. There are always going to be compromises in home theaters, you just have to pick what you can live with. I wouldn't go smaller with my screen size because the back row would be underwelming, and if I have a choice between being underwhelmed in the back row or overwhelmed in the front row, I'll take overwhelmed everyday. wink.gif

The trend for projectors is towards brighter and more detailed images. My screen will outlast my current projector, so I picked a size and fabric (Enlightor 4K) that will perform well now and into the future. I predict my next projector will be 4K and 25% brighter (different lamp tech). I like a large enveloping picture, but I don't want it to be dim or lack sharpness. So, currently, my JVC X70 is in high lamp mode, at a short throw, and I only watch bluray movies (and play a little Xbox 360). I'm very happy with the quality of the picture I'm getting. I can't imagine how good it will look with the next break-through in projector technology. But until then, I'll probably be replacing my bulb yearly to maintain my brightness.

As far as sitting close to the back wall, besides being an issue with back/surround speakers, there is also the issue with bass building up along the walls which can make the bass boomy and inarticulate.

"Trying is the first step towards failure" - Homer Simpson

 

willscam is offline  
Old 08-09-2012, 10:36 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jautor View Post

Thanks!
Ok, good - just checking because my Berklines aren't "huge", but certainly wouldn't have fit into that configuration... A 23" seat is narrow for a recliner, but I'll assume your math works from there! biggrin.gif I'd really recommend sitting in chairs if at all possible before purchasing, or at least getting some experts/users to comment on them (Roman would be the guy to ask).
Well, it might fit the seat, but the human extending over the edge will be the same. smile.gif Having some room in front of the reclined position is more important the more seats in the row - folks can't get out of my middle seats if the outer ones are reclined - but there's only one seat max from the middle to the aisle. Since you've got room, I'd recommend making that riser 6' or more (and pull the back row away from the wall 1-2').
Jeff

Yeah, i did sit in these at a home theater shop nearby. After sitting in a bunch of their seats, they probably had 8 or so seats on display, I liked these the best. And to my surprise, when I asked how much the those gray leather seats cost (they were gray), they said the Palliser Stereos were the least expensive seats on display and it wasn't leather but some micro fiber leather material. smile.gif Now, I didn't sit in them for an extended period of time so I will go back to give them a better test drive than what I did when I was browsing around before purchasing.

I agree about the legs extending. Will be playing with my the seating arrangement to get more leg and aisle space so that doesn't become an issue I regret

Also, definitely going to follow your advise in your thread about the screen size:

1) Wait until the room is complete before actually buying the projector
2) Wait until you have the projector before finalizing the screen size
3) Test screen size in the real space before hitting the "Buy" button...
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-09-2012, 10:46 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by willscam View Post

I'm happy with my screen size. The front row is great for 16:9 movies and the back row is great for 2.35 movies. There are always going to be compromises in home theaters, you just have to pick what you can live with. I wouldn't go smaller with my screen size because the back row would be underwelming, and if I have a choice between being underwhelmed in the back row or overwhelmed in the front row, I'll take overwhelmed everyday. wink.gif
The trend for projectors is towards brighter and more detailed images. My screen will outlast my current projector, so I picked a size and fabric (Enlightor 4K) that will perform well now and into the future. I predict my next projector will be 4K and 25% brighter (different lamp tech). I like a large enveloping picture, but I don't want it to be dim or lack sharpness. So, currently, my JVC X70 is in high lamp mode, at a short throw, and I only watch bluray movies (and play a little Xbox 360). I'm very happy with the quality of the picture I'm getting. I can't imagine how good it will look with the next break-through in projector technology. But until then, I'll probably be replacing my bulb yearly to maintain my brightness.
As far as sitting close to the back wall, besides being an issue with back/surround speakers, there is also the issue with bass building up along the walls which can make the bass boomy and inarticulate.

Willscam, thanks for the more detailed explanation. I want that large, enveloping picture mentioned and will follow juator's advice in picking the projector/screen mentioned in my last post which will probably lead me to a similarly sized screen as yours cool.gif. Now having to replace a bulb yearly.... Not sure how my lady will be liking that but that is a whole other problem to deal with. biggrin.gif
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-15-2012, 11:41 AM
Senior Member
 
willscam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Willscam, thanks for the more detailed explanation. I want that large, enveloping picture mentioned and will follow juator's advice in picking the projector/screen mentioned in my last post which will probably lead me to a similarly sized screen as yours cool.gif. Now having to replace a bulb yearly.... Not sure how my lady will be liking that but that is a whole other problem to deal with. biggrin.gif

Jautor's advice is very sound. Have fun with your theater!

"Trying is the first step towards failure" - Homer Simpson

 

willscam is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 03:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
My screen (painted wall actually) is 158 inches diagonal 2:35:1 (with masking it's 124 inches diagonal 16:9 - you can look at my room in link below) and it is plenty bright even with the lights on with my Epson 8350. I can't fully recommend the projector because this model is known for having all kinds of problems but I do love how the picture looks when I have one that is working right! My seating position is 14 feet away, I was 16.5 feet back for a long time but I recently moved up for acoustic reasons but also got the benefit of the screen looking even bigger!

That's the thing, screens always look smaller over time so go with as big as possible and the cost of new bulbs be damned!! smile.gif That's what I'm thinking anyway.
carp is offline  
Old 08-20-2012, 02:25 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

My screen (painted wall actually) is 158 inches diagonal 2:35:1 (with masking it's 124 inches diagonal 16:9 - you can look at my room in link below) and it is plenty bright even with the lights on with my Epson 8350. I can't fully recommend the projector because this model is known for having all kinds of problems but I do love how the picture looks when I have one that is working right! My seating position is 14 feet away, I was 16.5 feet back for a long time but I recently moved up for acoustic reasons but also got the benefit of the screen looking even bigger!
That's the thing, screens always look smaller over time so go with as big as possible and the cost of new bulbs be damned!! smile.gif That's what I'm thinking anyway.

Carp, thanks for your input. Yeah that 158" 2.35 screen you have looks sweet but how are you getting the 2.35 image with the Epson 8350? Are you using a lens or are you just zooming in on the projected 16:9 image to fill the 2.35 screen with the black bars projecting off the white screen?
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-20-2012, 04:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Carp, thanks for your input. Yeah that 158" 2.35 screen you have looks sweet but how are you getting the 2.35 image with the Epson 8350? Are you using a lens or are you just zooming in on the projected 16:9 image to fill the 2.35 screen with the black bars projecting off the white screen?

It's the opposite of what you said, I zoom 2:35:1 to fill the screen, and yeah the black bars are above and below the screen. Both with 16:9 and 2:35:1 the screen height is 61 inches and then for 16:9 I have masking panels.

It's a poor man's solution for sure. I figured when I did it I could always upgrade the projector sometime down the road. 1099 shipped for a picture that looks awesome, I'm very happy with it. You can't see the bars at all unless it is a pretty dark scene, and even then it's not too bad and I hardly notice it. Someday I will upgrade, but I didn't want to waste time saving up when I could enjoy an awesome picture now.
carp is offline  
Old 08-20-2012, 05:10 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rmaddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mapleton, UT
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

It's the opposite of what you said, I zoom 2:35:1 to fill the screen, and yeah the black bars are above and below the screen. Both with 16:9 and 2:35:1 the screen height is 61 inches and then for 16:9 I have masking panels.
It's a poor man's solution for sure. I figured when I did it I could always upgrade the projector sometime down the road. 1099 shipped for a picture that looks awesome, I'm very happy with it. You can't see the bars at all unless it is a pretty dark scene, and even then it's not too bad and I hardly notice it. Someday I will upgrade, but I didn't want to waste time saving up when I could enjoy an awesome picture now.

Nice. Makes sense. I'll have to consider that as my wife keeps on having a heart attack when I tell her the costs of things and with starting up from scratch pretty much, the total rises pretty quick. So doing something like that works for the time being and then I can consider upgrading to something 'legit' down the line. Wondering if the black bars would be even less obvious if you had darker walls...? Thanks again for the input.
rmaddog is offline  
Old 08-20-2012, 07:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Nice. Makes sense. I'll have to consider that as my wife keeps on having a heart attack when I tell her the costs of things and with starting up from scratch pretty much, the total rises pretty quick. So doing something like that works for the time being and then I can consider upgrading to something 'legit' down the line. Wondering if the black bars would be even less obvious if you had darker walls...? Thanks again for the input.

The front wall is already a dark color. If you go this route and are worried that the bars would show up you should go with a projector that has better blacks, the 8350 isn't known for good blacks that's for sure. You gotta dive in sometime, once you fire it up for the first time you will wonder why you waited so long! smile.gif
carp is offline  
Old 08-20-2012, 11:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RapalloAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 1,882
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmaddog View Post

Nice. Makes sense. I'll have to consider that as my wife keeps on having a heart attack when I tell her the costs of things and with starting up from scratch pretty much, the total rises pretty quick. So doing something like that works for the time being and then I can consider upgrading to something 'legit' down the line. Wondering if the black bars would be even less obvious if you had darker walls...? Thanks again for the input.
It is much better to have dark walls around the screen if you want to hide the black bars. The darker the better, just dont have white or cream.
RapalloAV is online now  
Old 08-21-2012, 07:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post

It is much better to have dark walls around the screen if you want to hide the black bars. The darker the better, just dont have white or cream.

Yep, my front wall used to be a light tan, now a very dark gray and it helped a lot.
carp is offline  
Old 08-22-2012, 08:12 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 668 Post(s)
Liked: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post

It is much better to have dark walls around the screen if you want to hide the black bars. The darker the better, just dont have white or cream.

And to expand on that, if the whole room has dark surfaces, you will see a big improvement. The cheapest improvement that will make a big difference in any room is painting any light colored walls or ceiling dark.

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, Falcon, DNP & more.
RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Tech., MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech, Denon, Marantz & Yamaha .
AV Science Sales 5 is offline  
Old 09-04-2012, 08:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
Crabalocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 931
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Hey carp, it was seeing your setup that has me wanting to go wide. What mode are you running your 8350 in to light up your screen?

I was thinking of going either 162" diagonal or 174" curved and using an anamorphic lens.

Thanks
Crabalocker is offline  
Old 09-06-2012, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabalocker View Post

Hey carp, it was seeing your setup that has me wanting to go wide. What mode are you running your 8350 in to light up your screen?
I was thinking of going either 162" diagonal or 174" curved and using an anamorphic lens.
Thanks

Haha, seems we are bad influences on each other. I think I told you this, but pics of your room were what motivated me to finally get a projector in the first place.

I use dynamic mode. I know people say that the brightest modes are bad for colors and what not, but from my 16' 10" throw distance on a 158 inch diagonal screen dynamic mode looks the best not only for brightness but for color as well.

My advice is go as big as possible, you will get used to the size very quickly and future projectors will only get better. smile.gif
carp is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 10:14 AM
Advanced Member
 
Crabalocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 931
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Yea that is funny.

One last question, how does the image look, 2.35:1, when the projector is in best mode? Do you think, in your honest opinion, that the Epson projectors have enough lumens to light a 162" 2.35:1 screen?

I have the 8500ub and recently bought the 8350 (strictly for daytime watching and especially for gaming,) because of the latency times of the 6010 but now will be the 6020 that I buy here shortly. The 8350 easily lights up my 153" 16:9 screen in best mode.

Thanks again
Crabalocker is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 11:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked: 603
I don't know how bright the other Epson models are, but yeah the 8350 is plenty bright in 2:35:1 on my 158 inch diagonal screen using dynamic mode. Sorry I'm not much help with that.
carp is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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