Originally Posted by HopefulFred
The baffle wall is looking strong. Nice!
On CIA vs CIH, I think it mostly comes down to whether or not you are a traditionalist. I am - at least to some extent - so CIH feels right to me. If you want the immersion with 16:9 and IMAX type content, go for it.
Maybe there's a gotcha in one of these ideas, but I doubt it. Is the taller screen going to lead to moire because of fabric tilt? Will the top/bottom masking look awkward or out of place on scope setup? Does the mask interfere with speaker placement? Are you spending big bucks or powered 4-way masking that you wouldn't otherwise?
Honestly the scope type viewing is hands down my favorite AR.. Thereason for the recent hair is primarily driven by the chase to recreate the IMAXlook in my little room, and a self preceived throw ratio issue...
Good thought on moiré question.. I guess that's one that Stewart or Seymourcould easily answer, but definitely falls in the additional research to dobox... The Acoustic Center of the mains have been set to between the 1/2 and5/8 point of the screen height, and I would keep the same center adding ~5" to both the top and bottom. The curved (manual) masks for the top andbottom from Seymour seemed reasonably priced @ < 500, they attach with magnetsI think, Havent priced any thing from Stewart, but I think the curved screen shuts the door on any remotely affordable automated masking solution.
Originally Posted by DavidK442
I'm not sure why the lumen requirement would be higher for CIA. Perhaps I don't understand how an anamorphic lens works.
Originally Posted by J_P_A
Wow! Looking great! How wide is your room, again? Can you just go wider on the screen until you reach the height limit? I now that's a compromise with image brightness, but just throwing it out there.
Originally Posted by doublewing11
CIA would be a great way to go.......for the longest time I planned on going that route, but chickened out. Definitely the best of both worlds if you plan to mask.
BTW, baffle wall looks great!
My room finished off at 14' 7 1/2" wide.. the opening between the drop ceiling and the stage is 90"
I plan on the front 2 - 6' sections of the wall to "angle in" towards the screen ~ 12" per side (all black fabric) So a 12' wide screen is about the widest I could go and keep my general plan... a 2.05 CIA would leave ~ 10" above and below.. while a 2:40 would leave ~ 15" above and below.
What I dont get yet, but need to, grasp is the differential in the mechanics/lens/zooming related to the trow ratios. etc between CIA and CIH and impact on brightness.
For a normal CIH/2:40/anamorphic setup the TR is based on the 16:9.
My projector location is fixed between ~ 19'6" and 20', so for a 12' wide 2:40 thats a 16:9 image width of 106, TR of ~2.25 (pushing the high end without expensive optional lenses).. in this scenerio.. the Alens uses all of the pixels for full brightness when it stretches to 2:40.
When calculating for CIA.. My "original assumption" (this is where I think I was wrong) is the TR is still based on the 16:9 image since that is what is native to the projector. So roughly a 124" wide 16:9 give a TR of ~ 1.94 (much better range) But then something different had to happen beside just Vstrecthing the image and sliding the lens into place to get to 2:40....
So now I'm operating under the assumption that CIA need to keep the same TR as CIH but it Zooms out for the full 16:9 coverage. In which case CIA would not help with being at the long end of the TR..
But I dont know the impact this zoom has on brightness due to the Iris openings etc..Help..