Carada CIH Masking System Anticipation Thread - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 190 Old 03-11-2009, 08:23 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Carada Masquerade Constant Image Height (CIH) Masking System (& Others...)

Based on confirmation of a prototype of the CIH masking system - link - I started this anticipation thread.
Carada info: David Giles (of Carada) – much of this preliminary is extracted from his posts on the “Carada New Masking System” & subsequent posts in this thread.

*Updates*
Updates added: 2/3/2011
The world "anticipation" removed from top, since this is now a purchasable product.

Reviews
from Alan Gouger - "Carada's New Masquerade C.I.H. Masking System" - AVS Thread

Install pics (shortcut links):
- HD in Ohio - link
- Jay5298 - 3/18/2010 - link
- R Harkness - 2/3/2011 - link
- Juliio (DevilDog93) - pending

Carada
Pics - Link - http://www.carada.com/MasqueradeCIH.aspx
Prices - Link - http://www.carada.com/Category.aspx?CategoryID=19


Information:
- single motor changed to dual motor system
- CIH - Now the CIH system we're working on will do EXACTLY what you want, which is to mask your 2.40:1 screen down to 4:3. It will be a "2-way" system which means that it has two masking panels, and those panels will slide in and out from the sides so it can mask a scope screen to any desired aspect ratio, from the "native" aspect ratio of 2.40:1 (or 2.35:1, 2.37:1, or 2.39:1 - customer's choice) all the way down to 4:3.

- Pre-set image widths (via remote): "...exact control parameters aren't written in stone at this point, but we hope to have four pre-set image widths - "Wide" (fully open to whatever the native aspect ratio of the screen is), 1.85:1, 16:9, and 4:3." - David Giles
- 4 discreet settings - LINK

- Dimensions - frame:6.25" wide all the way around and 3.75" deep
Need 0.75" of 'free and clear' space above the system and
2" of 'free and clear' space on each side of the system
(this side space is necessary for installation of the side fascia).

- Jog - "But our system will definitely have "Jog" capability which is NOT true of all CIH masking systems."

- “Not a 4-way masking system has FOUR masking panels - two horizontal masks for masking top and bottom black bars and two vertical masks for masking side black bars (Stewart's $25K Director's Choice system is a good example). A 4-way masking system isn't necessary for native 2.35:1/2.40:1 screens (unless you absolutely INSIST on being able to mask the top/bottom black bars that you would encounter on the TINY handful of films on the market that are wider than 2.40:1; and I'm not aware of ANY company that makes a "scope" system with 4-way masking). 4-way systems are typically made for 16:9 screens, although they can be used in custom setups similar to what Rich Harkness is planning (2.05:1 screen with a horizontal Masquerade for masking top/bottom black bars and motorized curtains for masking side black bars).”

- The prototype's working great but we're still working on engineering/refining/sourcing several components for the production version (all sorts of new custom steel brackets, a new aluminum extrusion, cables, pulleys, slides, etc.) as well as working out our production methods.

- No adjustable rate control - per post #5 - David Giles - "The Masquerade CIH won't have "adjustable rate control" (in other words the motor will be constant-RPM) but as far as I know that is true of EVERY masking system on the market (certainly all the ones using Somfy motors-which is most of them).

- Accoustical transparent - may be available in the future

- Release date: Before/Around August 2009. It's available now (8/2009)


Wish List
- adjustable rate control (for fine/micro tuning of aspect ratio, the Rich question) - Per post #5 - David Giles - "The Masquerade CIH won't have "adjustable rate control" (in other words the motor will be constant-RPM) but as far as I know that is true of EVERY masking system on the market (certainly all the ones using Somfy motors-which is most of them). But our system will definitely have "Jog" capability which is NOT true of all CIH masking systems."


Links:
www.Carada.com
I just saw this on the Carada Site (6/14/09):
LINK
2.35:1
"The Masquerade™ CIH Constant Image Height system brings all the MAGIC of the Cinema to your home theater! When the movie starts and the masks quietly glide open revealing your cinemawide screen in all its glory, you and your guests will relive your favorite movie moments all over again. Whether you're watching Casablanca in 4:3, the Super Bowl in 16:9, Bolt in 1.85:1, or Quantum of Solace in 2.40:1, your Masquerade CIH will perfectly frame your image. In addition to the four discreet settings, the Masquerade™ CIH also has "Jog" capability for less common aspect ratios anywhere between 2.40:1 and 4:3. Masquerade™ CIH premiering summer 2009!"

CIH link - http://www.carada.com/Masquerade-Masking-System.aspx
CIH calculator - http://www.carada.com/MasqueradeCIHCalculator.aspx


REVIEW Home Theater
http://www.hometheatermag.com/accessories/1008car/index.html

The new vertical masking system is at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMRQ1ciNFz0

Other links
Variable Masking Quick Reference (from Stewart) - link

Potential Competition for the Carada CIH
CIH masking
- Somis CIH masking system - AVS link - $1490 (120" diagonal w/base motor - Somis1) - as of 11/19/10 it looks like this projected died off.
--- Somis - link - http://www.somissystems.com/product_...&products_id=1
--- "Motor upgrade kits are not currently available and are expected to be in stock as of July, 2010."
- Stewart - VistaScope & VistaScope Jumbo
- SMX PROMASK-CH - CIH masking system - link - $11,012 MSRP
- Vutec Dyna-Curve VM - link
- HTIQ CIH (Note: DIY, so your mileage may vary!) - link

4-way masking
- Stewart - Director's Choice Ultimate Masking Screen
- SMX PROMASK QUAD - 4 way masking - link - $13,775 MSRP

Manual
SMX Pro panels (fixed) - link - Sets From $299.95 MSRP

--- SMX Pro panels AVS discussion thread - link



Mike


PS - I'm no Neuromancer (RE: Oppo BDP83 threads), but I'll try to keep this thread updated.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 190 Old 03-11-2009, 08:27 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
reserved


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #3 of 190 Old 03-12-2009, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Ballentine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 5,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is a very exciting item!

It's critical (to me) that I can jog the masks (back & forth) into various positions for any desired width. I watch a lot of older films (and newer) and they can have some pretty odd aspect ratios.

I've noticed on my 2:40 CCW screen (120" wide) my side bars can really vary in width. Sometimes they are 13½"(Hollow Man), 14½" (Spiderman), 16½"(Terror Of The Tongs), 17¼" (The Earth Dies Screaming), 25" (1933 King Kong), 25¾" (1953 War Of The Worlds)

Thanks for starting this thread Mike
John Ballentine is offline  
post #4 of 190 Old 03-12-2009, 01:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 329
If this item is as slick as the current Masquerade at near the same price point, it should be a hot seller. It almost makes me wish I were going with a CIH set up.

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #5 of 190 Old 03-13-2009, 06:31 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Thanks for the interest guys!

The Masquerade CIH won't have "adjustable rate control" (in other words the motor will be constant-RPM) but as far as I know that is true of EVERY masking system on the market (certainly all the ones using Somfy motors-which is most of them). But our system will definitely have "Jog" capability which is NOT true of all CIH masking systems. Without Jog capability you only get two or three factory-set presets (usually 2.35:1, 16:9, and 4:3) and as John pointed out that will leave you with some significant black bars on a wide variety of films with "odd" aspect ratios. But on systems with Jog capability, you will be able to adjust the masks VERY close to the aspect ratio of any film with an aspect ratio between 4:3 and the native aspect ratio of the system you order (2.40:1, 2.39:1, 2.37:1, or 2.35:1 - customer's choice). The Jog function allows you to adjust the masks in approx. 1/2" increments, so in the WORST case (assuming the image is centered on the screen) you would either have 1/4" of black bars still showing OR you could "overmask" the image by 1/4". And although "normal sized" black bars are very distracting and are the reason that every projection screen company has been developing a wide variety of masking systems to deal with the issue, 1/4" wide black bars are pretty much a non-issue and if that's all we had to deal with we'd NEVER sell any masking systems. Thank goodness for all those different aspect ratios and BIG black bars...

The price point on the Masquerade CIH will be higher than our current Horizontal and Vertical systems, but it will be WAAAYYYY below competitive systems like Stewart's VistaScope, Screen Research's Supreme Cinescope XMask, SMX's PROMASKch, or Vutec's Vision XFT (I don't believe Da-Lite and Draper offer CIH systems with masks that glide in and out from the sides - they only offer "drop-down" vertical systems). As I mentioned in the other thread, the price isn't set in stone yet, but the Masquerade CIH should come in under $4K for a mid-size system (screen sold separately, but with screen it will STILL be WAAYYYY below any other system).

As with our other masking systems, the Masquerade CIH can be installed over MOST popular flat fixed frame screens on the market including screens from Stewart, Da-Lite, Draper, Vutec, etc. (as long as the frame width doesn't exceed 3.3").

Quote:
It almost makes me wish I were going with a CIH set up.

I know how you feel Rich!! My theater is width-limited and I already have the largest 16:9 setup that my theater can accommodate. So if I switch to a CIH system I would have the same width 2.35:1 image that I already have, while my 16:9 image would shrink considerably. So I'll probably just stick with my Horizontal Masquerade (which is very cool in its own right), but it's HIGHLY tempting to switch and give up the 16:9 size because when those masks open up on the CIH system and that wide screen appears in all its glory, it's just so darn cinematic!

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
post #6 of 190 Old 03-13-2009, 07:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Giles View Post




I know how you feel Rich!! My theater is width-limited and I already have the largest 16:9 setup that my theater can accommodate. So if I switch to a CIH system I would have the same width 2.35:1 image that I already have, while my 16:9 image would shrink considerably. So I'll probably just stick with my Horizontal Masquerade (which is very cool in its own right), but it's HIGHLY tempting to switch and give up the 16:9 size because when those masks open up on the CIH system and that wide screen appears in all its glory, it's just so darn cinematic!

David Giles
Carada, Inc.

Yes, a number of people on the Constant Image Height forum have sacrificed some of their 16:9 image area to do CIH and have been happy doing so.

It's completely understandable to want the biggest image size you can get for all ARs, especially when width-challenged. So the biggest 16:9 screen you can fit makes sense if considered on those grounds alone.

However, the the rational for CIH is slightly different and I believe it has to do with phenomenon relative impact. What is often not taken into account by people is not simply the over all choice of size of a screen, but the fact that whatever size you choose will set up a relationship you'll experience between the impact of differing aspect ratios on that screen.

When you choose a 16:9 screen all your 16:9/1:85:1 AR films are going to have the most area and therefore the most size and visual impact. When you switch to a 2:35:1 movie it's going to feel smaller, less impactful, because of your familiarity with the 16:9 size images. It's a relative thing. Like you buy a screen that feels big in your room. But then you go spend some time at a friend's house who has a far larger screen. You come home and suddenly your screen doesn't feel so big any more; it may even feel small in comparison. Just as our growing computer screen sizes and tv sizes make our older ones look smaller than when we were using them.

No matter how big a 16:9 screen you choose you are going to experience a reduction in relative impact when you switch to the 2:35:1 films. Whereas if you choose a 2:35:1 screen, even in a width challenged room, you'll get the reverse: the relative size changes between your 16:9 image and the 2:35:1 image will make your 2:35:1 image feel much bigger, have a "wow" effect that wouldn't happen with the same sized 2:35:1 image on a 16:9 screen.

So we make our choice which aspect ratio we want to give the most relative impact: 16:9 or 2:35:1. Constant Image Height devotees choose to favor 2:35:1 widescreen movies for having more impact (feeling this feels more right and is how it is supposed to be in the first place).

Then there are folks like me who didn't want to compromise any AR's relative impact...but that's a whole 'nuther headache

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #7 of 190 Old 03-26-2009, 06:52 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ballentine View Post

This is a very exciting item!

It's critical (to me) that I can jog the masks (back & forth) into various positions for any desired width. I watch a lot of older films (and newer) and they can have some pretty odd aspect ratios.

I've noticed on my 2:40 CCW screen (120" wide) my side bars can really vary in width. Sometimes they are 13½"(Hollow Man), 14½" (Spiderman), 16½"(Terror Of The Tongs), 17¼" (The Earth Dies Screaming), 25" (1933 King Kong), 25¾" (1953 War Of The Worlds)

Thanks for starting this thread Mike

John -

You're welcome.
I think there is a lot of interest in this.
Thanks for the measurements as examples.

I've been watching the Pinnochio BR a lot (3yo) and the 4:3 image needs some masking!

Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #8 of 190 Old 03-26-2009, 06:53 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Giles View Post

Thanks for the interest guys!

The Masquerade CIH won't have "adjustable rate control" (in other words the motor will be constant-RPM) but as far as I know that is true of EVERY masking system on the market (certainly all the ones using Somfy motors-which is most of them). But our system will definitely have "Jog" capability which is NOT true of all CIH masking systems. Without Jog capability you only get two or three factory-set presets (usually 2.35:1, 16:9, and 4:3) and as John pointed out that will leave you with some significant black bars on a wide variety of films with "odd" aspect ratios. But on systems with Jog capability, you will be able to adjust the masks VERY close to the aspect ratio of any film with an aspect ratio between 4:3 and the native aspect ratio of the system you order (2.40:1, 2.39:1, 2.37:1, or 2.35:1 - customer's choice). The Jog function allows you to adjust the masks in approx. 1/2" increments, so in the WORST case (assuming the image is centered on the screen) you would either have 1/4" of black bars still showing OR you could "overmask" the image by 1/4". And although "normal sized" black bars are very distracting and are the reason that every projection screen company has been developing a wide variety of masking systems to deal with the issue, 1/4" wide black bars are pretty much a non-issue and if that's all we had to deal with we'd NEVER sell any masking systems. Thank goodness for all those different aspect ratios and BIG black bars...

The price point on the Masquerade CIH will be higher than our current Horizontal and Vertical systems, but it will be WAAAYYYY below competitive systems like Stewart's VistaScope, Screen Research's Supreme Cinescope XMask, SMX's PROMASKch, or Vutec's Vision XFT (I don't believe Da-Lite and Draper offer CIH systems with masks that glide in and out from the sides - they only offer "drop-down" vertical systems). As I mentioned in the other thread, the price isn't set in stone yet, but the Masquerade CIH should come in under $4K for a mid-size system (screen sold separately, but with screen it will STILL be WAAYYYY below any other system).

As with our other masking systems, the Masquerade CIH can be installed over MOST popular flat fixed frame screens on the market including screens from Stewart, Da-Lite, Draper, Vutec, etc. (as long as the frame width doesn't exceed 3.3").



I know how you feel Rich!! My theater is width-limited and I already have the largest 16:9 setup that my theater can accommodate. So if I switch to a CIH system I would have the same width 2.35:1 image that I already have, while my 16:9 image would shrink considerably. So I'll probably just stick with my Horizontal Masquerade (which is very cool in its own right), but it's HIGHLY tempting to switch and give up the 16:9 size because when those masks open up on the CIH system and that wide screen appears in all its glory, it's just so darn cinematic!

David Giles
Carada, Inc.

David -

Thanks.
I'll update the first post about rate control.

Any ETA yet?


Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #9 of 190 Old 03-26-2009, 06:54 AM
Member
 
keithishere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"I know how you feel Rich!! My theater is width-limited and I already have the largest 16:9 setup that my theater can accommodate. So if I switch to a CIH system I would have the same width 2.35:1 image that I already have, while my 16:9 image would shrink considerably. So I'll probably just stick with my Horizontal Masquerade (which is very cool in its own right), but it's HIGHLY tempting to switch and give up the 16:9 size because when those masks open up on the CIH system and that wide screen appears in all its glory, it's just so darn cinematic!"

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


I'm in the same boat... My Masquerade is still working great!

But David do I get a 1 year upgrade trade-in?


keith
keithishere is offline  
post #10 of 190 Old 03-27-2009, 06:29 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
The Masquerada CIH project is coming along nicely but at this point there's no change as to when we expect to have it ready for market (early summer).

No Keith I'm afraid there isn't a trade-in program. But if you invite a bunch of your local home theater enthusiasts over to see your current system I bet you won't have much trouble selling it.

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
post #11 of 190 Old 04-02-2009, 08:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 329
I just noticed that an obvious question has not been asked about this new Carada CIH masking system: What type of pre-set image widths, if any, will be available via the remote?

The original Masquerade has 2 pre-sets (16:9 and 2:35:1). But this CIH system will have more AR widths to contend with: 2:35:1, 1:85:1, 4:3, and several in between.

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #12 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 10:43 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Sorry about the delay in replying Rich! The exact control parameters aren't written in stone at this point, but we hope to have four pre-set image widths - "Wide" (fully open to whatever the native aspect ratio of the screen is), 1.85:1, 16:9, and 4:3.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
post #13 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 11:13 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Giles View Post

Sorry about the delay in replying Rich! The exact control parameters aren't written in stone at this point, but we hope to have four pre-set image widths - "Wide" (fully open to whatever the native aspect ratio of the screen is), 1.85:1, 16:9, and 4:3.

David -

Thanks.
I updated post #1.

Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #14 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 11:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 329
David,

Sounds good. The main ARs would be covered and it's reasonable that the owner will just jog the masks for less common ARs.

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #15 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 02:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
Drexler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 935
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Make the screen in 2.40:1 and add 2.35:1 to the pre-sets and all major ratios would be covered.

It is, at least to me, more important to have 2.40 and 2.35 masking covered than differentiation between 16:9 and 1.85:1 since most movies are in cinemascope format. However, with the jog mode maybe it isn't that much of a deal?

Anyway, looking forward to see your product when it's ready!
Drexler is online now  
post #16 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 02:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Make the screen in 2.40:1 and add 2.35:1 to the pre-sets and all major ratios would be covered.

It is, at least to me, more important to have 2.40 and 2.35 masking covered than differentiation between 16:9 and 1.85:1 since most movies are in cinemascope format. However, with the jog mode maybe it isn't that much of a deal?

Anyway, looking forward to see your product when it's ready!

Drexler -

I have a 2.40:1 screen, so I don't disagree with you.
I think the problem is that there is 2.40, 2.39, 2.37, 2.35.
But a 2.35 setting would allow only small "jogs" for other aspect ratios.

Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #17 of 190 Old 04-03-2009, 03:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post


It is, at least to me, more important to have 2.40 and 2.35 masking covered than differentiation between 16:9 and 1.85:1 since most movies are in cinemascope format.

Just a quibble: most films aren't in CinemaScope.

But...I like that aspect ratio best, nonetheless.

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #18 of 190 Old 04-04-2009, 02:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
Drexler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 935
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_WI View Post

Drexler -

I have a 2.40:1 screen, so I don't disagree with you.
I think the problem is that there is 2.40, 2.39, 2.37, 2.35.
But a 2.35 setting would allow only small "jogs" for other aspect ratios.

Mike

I haven't heard of any films that are made in 2.37. Isn't that just the format you get with the a-lens? 2.39 is so close to 2.40 that you wouldn't notice the blackbars och could use minimal overscan on the frame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Just a quibble: most films aren't in CinemaScope.

But...I like that aspect ratio best, nonetheless.

Well, I don't have any statistics here so that might very well be true, but I have noticed that the majority of films I watch (maybe 80% or so) are in cinemascope format. I guess it might be different if you watch a lot of independent small budget films though.
Drexler is online now  
post #19 of 190 Old 04-05-2009, 06:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
John Ballentine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 5,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I keep track of the films I watch. I just checked and of the last 100 films I watched in my main Home Theater (120" wide 2:40 screen) - 74 were scope. However in my #2 theater (w/ much smaller screen) - where I watch older films (pre-1953) and lesser quality formats (including VHS, Laserdisc, DVD-R's) it's just the opposite. Of the last 100 films I watched - only 5 were scope! So Yes - it depends on your viewing habits.
John Ballentine is offline  
post #20 of 190 Old 04-05-2009, 06:39 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

I haven't heard of any films that are made in 2.37. Isn't that just the format you get with the a-lens? 2.39 is so close to 2.40 that you wouldn't notice the blackbars och could use minimal overscan on the frame.



Well, I don't have any statistics here so that might very well be true, but I have noticed that the majority of films I watch (maybe 80% or so) are in cinemascope format. I guess it might be different if you watch a lot of independent small budget films though.

Drexler -

You may be right.
I just did a cursory google search and only found "Just Cause" as being 2.37:1 in laser disc.

If there are other 2.37:1 aspect ratios, it likely is not very common.
I'm sure there must be a large searchable database to better answer the question.

Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #21 of 190 Old 04-06-2009, 08:53 AM
Member
 
Rex Bittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_WI View Post

Drexler -


I'm sure there must be a large searchable database to better answer the question.

Mike


Maybe this has been posted before but check this out. I have a feeling this list is not being updated regularly but there is still a lot of information here.

http://www.imdb.com/Sections/DVDs/AspectRatios

Rex Bittle

Rex Bittle is offline  
post #22 of 190 Old 04-06-2009, 09:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Make the screen in 2.40:1 and add 2.35:1 to the pre-sets and all major ratios would be covered.

It is, at least to me, more important to have 2.40 and 2.35 masking covered than differentiation between 16:9 and 1.85:1 since most movies are in cinemascope format. However, with the jog mode maybe it isn't that much of a deal?

Anyway, looking forward to see your product when it's ready!

The reason we won't have a "dedicated" 2.35:1 button on the remote is that we are designing in the flexibility to offer the Masquerade CIH in any of the commonly requested CIH aspect ratios - 2.35:1, 2.37:1, 2.39:1 or 2.40:1. So the "Wide" button will represent the native aspect ratio (i.e. masks fully open) of whatever system the customer orders. And as Drexler mentioned, if you get a system with one of the wider native aspect ratios then a quick Jog or two will take care of whatever tiny bars you may have on the sides. And to anticipate the question, we won't really be advocating one native aspect ratio over the other. If you have a strong opinion about which native A/R is "correct" then you can have it your way.

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
post #23 of 190 Old 04-06-2009, 10:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
Drexler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 935
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Giles View Post

The reason we won't have a "dedicated" 2.35:1 button on the remote is that we are designing in the flexibility to offer the Masquerade CIH in any of the commonly requested CIH aspect ratios - 2.35:1, 2.37:1, 2.39:1 or 2.40:1. So the "Wide" button will represent the native aspect ratio (i.e. masks fully open) of whatever system the customer orders. And as Drexler mentioned, if you get a system with one of the wider native aspect ratios then a quick Jog or two will take care of whatever tiny bars you may have on the sides. And to anticipate the question, we won't really be advocating one native aspect ratio over the other. If you have a strong opinion about which native A/R is "correct" then you can have it your way.

David Giles
Carada, Inc.

Of course 2.40:1 is the correct one!

Seriously though, with this ratio you can have masking for all other ratios (except very rare ones like 2.70:1...). Whereas with a 2.37/2.35:1 screen you can never have perfect masking for a 2.40:1 movie. So I don't really see the point why anyone would go with these ratios?

It makes perfect sense if you don't use masking, since then there will always be ratios that doesn't fit the screen, but not with CIH-masking enabled.

Maybe someone can explain it to me?
Drexler is online now  
post #24 of 190 Old 04-06-2009, 07:02 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
? 2.70:1 ?

How about 2.89:1 - How The West Was Won

or

"Smile Box"



Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #25 of 190 Old 04-21-2009, 06:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Samaritano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Is the dimension of the frame going to be similar to the current Masquerade ™ offering of 6¼" ?

Edgar
Samaritano is offline  
post #26 of 190 Old 04-21-2009, 07:01 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Mike_WI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samaritano View Post

Is the dimension of the frame going to be similar to the current Masquerade offering of 6¼" ?

Good question!
I'm looking for a center channel stand and need to know how high the stand + center channel can be.

I think I recollect that it is going to be the same as the current Masquerade, but we'll see what David says.

Mike


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mike_WI is offline  
post #27 of 190 Old 04-21-2009, 08:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 148
I'm definitely watching this

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
stanger89 is online now  
post #28 of 190 Old 04-22-2009, 06:08 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samaritano View Post

Is the dimension of the frame going to be similar to the current Masquerade offering of 6¼" ?

Yes the Masquerade CIH will have the exact same frame dimensions and installation space requirements as our current horizontal and vertical systems. So the frame will be 6.25" wide all the way around and 3.75" deep. And you will need to have .75" of 'free and clear' space above the system as well as 2" of 'free and clear' space on each side of the system (this side space is necessary for installation of the side fascia).

The masking system's frame covers the screen's frame (but the screen frame members must be no wider than 3.3") so you can simply add 12.5" to your viewing surface's dimensions to get the outside dimensions of the matching Masquerade. For example if your screen's VIEWING SURFACE is 120"x50", then the OUTSIDE frame dimensions of the matching Masquerade CIH would be 132.5"x62.5". And the space needed on your wall for installation of this particular system would be 136.5"x63.25".

But the 2" of 'free and clear' space needed on each side is ONLY needed during installation of the side fascia, so AFTER you've completed the installation of the Masquerade then you could actually put speakers (or shelves or whatever) right up against the side fascia of the system. Just keep in mind that you would have to remove those speakers FIRST if you ever needed to take the Masquerade down.

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
post #29 of 190 Old 04-22-2009, 06:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Oh, I didn't see this asked yet. Is the masking acoustically transparent?

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
stanger89 is online now  
post #30 of 190 Old 04-22-2009, 06:40 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
David Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Carada Projection Screens
Posts: 433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Oh, I didn't see this asked yet. Is the masking acoustically transparent?

Our standard masking material is not acoustically transparent, and although we don't expect to have that option available at the initial release of the CIH system, we do plan to offer it in the near future.

David Giles
Carada, Inc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What image do YOU want to project?
David Giles is offline  
Reply Screens

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