Da-lite Hi Power New or Old what did you get? - Page 20 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #571 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 09:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FLBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: S.W. Florida
Posts: 1,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
@DrMark: Nice job, Mark! I haven't had a lot of time to play with your improved version specifically for the HP 2.4 and 2.8, but it looks good to me so far. The accuracy appears to be much better than that of the general purpose All Screen Gain Calculator, as one should expect for a calculator optimized for one (or in this case two) particular screen gain curves. I highly recommend that those considering the HP and desiring the best possible accuracy in gain estimation should download and use this new version generously provided by DrMark.

This does not mean that the original All Screen Gain Calculator is "flawed," as one poster has suggested. It does mean that a calculator designed for estimating the gains of lots of different kinds of screens will likely be less accurate than one that is optimized for one or two screens. By all means continue to use the original ASGC for non-HP screens to get a sense of how they will perform in your environment.

.

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.
FLBoy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #572 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 09:59 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLBoy View Post

It's a zipped (compressed) file. You need WinZip or some other compatible software to unzip it. (WinZip is a free download.)


Thanks.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #573 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 10:00 AM
Member
 
DrMark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In my opinion, the original All Screen Gain calculator is fine for what it does, which is allow you to compare several different screen materials to see what best fits your viewing situation. The problem with the high-power material is that it doesn't exactly act like other material when the viewing angle changes, so it is hard to have a one size fits all calculator that includes this material.

Since there is a lot of use of this calculator for trying to determine how the high-power screen will work in individual viewing environments, I decided to spend some time trying to come up with a more precise version. Also, since there is a lot of discussion about 2.4 vs 2.8 material, I thought it would be nice to allow people to compare these two materials in the same calculator. Admittedly, it would have been of more use to everybody if I had done this a year ago, but I wasn't all that tuned into the discussion back then.

Everybody should realize that the calculator is only as good as the data I pulled off of the Da-Lite gain chart I attached. Although I do have a 2.8 gain high-power, I do not have accurate enough measuring equipment to be able to collect my own data(*). If somebody can independently confirm the measurements, it would be a good double check.

In reality, you are not going to notice the difference between a 1.2 and a 1.3 gain screen unless you see them side by side, so I wouldn't put too much stock in the last couple decimal points of precision. I think the real use of the calculator is for somebody to see if they use this material with their setup, will the gain for their seating positions be higher, the same, or lower than other material they are considering. This is particularly important with 3D setups because the nature of 3D *really* sucks away the light and you need all of the gain you can get.

The high-power material isn't "magic" in that it doesn't amplify light or anything; it just concentrates the reflected light in a smaller area. This makes the screen look brighter in some places and darker in others. The calculator lets you determine if you will be sitting in a brighter area or a darker area.

For what it is worth, I really like my high-power screen. When watching a movie, I can stand up from my prime seat and not really notice much of a change in brightness at all even though the gain changes considerably from the seated position to the standing position. This is because the human eye is really good at adapting to changing illumination levels. I'm just saying this to try to put to rest some of the concerns that if you have a high-power screen, you will see all kinds of changes in brightness just by moving your head around; you won't. The only point I'm trying to make is that the high-power is great for some setups and not as good as other material for other setups. Hopefully the new version of the calculator will help some people figure out if they are one of the people who can make use of it.

I hope the new version helps some people out.

(*) I do have a 2.8 screen, an i1D2 and an i1Pro. I suppose I could take some measurements to see how well they align. The problem would be getting the angles right.

--Mark
DrMark is offline  
post #574 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 10:02 AM
Member
 
DrMark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just realized that the version of the calculator I posted is in Excel 2007 format, and some people may have older versions of Excel. Since I don't think I made use of any of the newer Excel features, I'll see if I can convert it to an older format that more people can use.

--Mark
DrMark is offline  
post #575 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 11:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
newfmp3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NFLD, Canada
Posts: 3,903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 116
now that I got my 2.4 screen, of course I stuck the 2.8 sample near it (not on it) to compare - it's interesting to say the least.

The 2.8 is pretty much brighter with my setup at every seat in the room. Now, saying that. My room is 19' long, 12.3' wide. I have two couches that seat 3 people each. second couch is on a 6" riser. 7.5' ceilings. Ceiling mounted Projector with 20" drop. 54x96 screen @ 110". Giving details as each room should be different.

There is a better viewing angle with the 2.4. BUT, I need to be up close to screen, like 5' from it, and to the side of it, and at that point, the 2.4 is clearly brighter. But I'll never sit there.

The 2.4 doesn't really have a sheen or paisley look to it in bright scenes with normal watching. But if I take a flashlight, lamp etc and observe from inches away, there is a noticeable reflective type pattern to it, almost like marks from rollers. Again, it's something you can't see unless inches away from it. I can however see a paisley type effect in bright scenes with my 2.8 sample. Barely.

Coming from an Angular screen. The M2500 with a +2 gain. I am surprised at the amount of light the 2.4 catches from other sources in the room. Windows, I have night lights near the floor, if I keep my pot lights low etc, you can clearly see the screen effected by it. It's got kind of a cool glow effect when not using the screen though as it just sits there picking up lights in the house.

My M2500, old version was clearly better at black levels. It's a no contest, painfully obvious scenario. I am now curious to see the new m2500 on it and will try it later on.

Now the good. Just talking about the 2.4 now. I see no hot spotting, no real color shifting as I walk around room. There is a slight brightness shift as you get to the sweet spot, but honestly only "we" would notice. Average users are just going to sit down and say whoa! regardless of where they sit. Its actually quite amazing how even the gain is across the screen. After looking at the samples you would think there would be a larger more noticeable difference but there isn't. Blacks are a touch, and I mean very minor touch better then the 2.8 that I can see.

For a long and narrow room like mine, I still say the 2.8 is better. In fact, I think I was happier with the old m2500 despite it's minor flaws over the 2.4. Too bad you can't get either anymore. I have already contacted Da-Lite with my "opinion" on the 2.4. It should have been a seperate product, not a replacement.

For a Wide room, the 2.4 may work out better for you.
newfmp3 is offline  
post #576 of 583 Old 01-25-2011, 03:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
rana_kirti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

so is Flboy's calculator flawed and all the measurements we've been getting till now been wrong all along...?


Quote:
Originally Posted by FLBoy View Post

@DrMark: Nice job, Mark! I haven't had a lot of time to play with your improved version specifically for the HP 2.4 and 2.8, but it looks good to me so far. The accuracy appears to be much better than that of the general purpose All Screen Gain Calculator, as one should expect for a calculator optimized for one (or in this case two) particular screen gain curves. I highly recommend that those considering the HP and desiring the best possible accuracy in gain estimation should download and use this new version generously provided by DrMark.

This does not mean that the original All Screen Gain Calculator is "flawed," as one poster has suggested. It does mean that a calculator designed for estimating the gains of lots of different kinds of screens will likely be less accurate than one that is optimized for one or two screens. By all means continue to use the original ASGC for non-HP screens to get a sense of how they will perform in your environment.


i guess flawed was a wrong choice of word on my part.... so my apologies there to FLboy.... I'm grateful for the All Screen Gain Calculator that you came up with and so are many others here....

Thanks,

Rana

a few funny stories from my life ------->
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
rana_kirti is online now  
post #577 of 583 Old 01-30-2011, 10:46 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 443
I ended up getting a sample of the 2.4 since I was curious how it would do in my room/setup vs the 2.8 I have now. According to the old calculator, the 2.4 should have given me better brightness at the extreme left and extreme right seats of my couch compared to the 2.8, but after throwing the 12" x 12" 2.4 sample up 6" in front of my 2.8 (so the 2.4 was actually getting more brightness from the projector slightly vs the 2.8) the results showed otherwise. The 2.8 was still brighter in every seat on my couch and I had to stick my head way off the end of the couch (where nobody would ever sit) to get both screens to match up in brightness. So, the old calculator is definitely a bit off as far as trying to compare the old/new material with brightness.

The other thing that I noticed right off the bat is how much thinner and more flimsy the new 2.4 material is. The 2.8 has a thicker and more sturdy quality to it that is obvious when holding both.

Having said all that, the 2.4 still seemed like a great screen and the brightness difference was not huge (but again, it was noticeable).

I guess my question though is why in the world did DaLite get rid of the 2.8???? From my tests, you would really need a wide seating area to get ANY advantage out of the 2.4 (like I said, I had to stick my head way off the side of the couch just to get them to match) and even then, it would only have the slight advantage in these FAR off to the side seats........all the seats closer to center will still be brighter with the 2.8. Bummer the 2.8 is no longer available

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #578 of 583 Old 01-31-2011, 09:28 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Excellent reports on the new HP material guys!

Toe,

What I would be interested in is not so much whether the 2.8 version remains brighter overall from various angles, but whether the 2.4 changes brightness less obviously from on and off-axis viewing angles. Could you comment on that? Thanks.

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 online now  
post #579 of 583 Old 01-31-2011, 10:30 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Excellent reports on the new HP material guys!

Toe,

What I would be interested in is not so much whether the 2.8 version remains brighter overall from various angles, but whether the 2.4 changes brightness less obviously from on and off-axis viewing angles. Could you comment on that? Thanks.

It was kind of hard to tell, but I would have to say that the 2.4 would be better in this way simply from the fact that I could get the 2.4 to be a bit brighter when leaning my head WAY off the end of my couch............considering the 2.4 starts dimmer (and is still dimmer in my end couch seats) and then gets slightly brighter near the boundary width of my room, I think its safe to say the brightness change is more subtle/gradual. Considering your findings with the 2.8, this 2.4 might be the ticket for your setup if you were wanting to roll the dice moving away from the ST130 (which is hard to do since that is such a great screen!). I would suggest ordering a 12"x12" sample and checking it out for yourself so you can see what I am talking about.

One thing I would like to reiterate though is that the 2.4 sample was ~1' closer (I thought it was ~6", but its more like 1' after I messed with this sample again yesterday for a bit) to my projector vs the 2.8 sample which actually gave the 2.4 a slight advantage as far as lumens it was getting from my RS40. Even with this advantage, the 2.8 was still brighter in every seat on my couch (again though, not a night/day difference by any means, but noticeable). Chances are, if I put the 2.4 at the exact same distance as the 2.8, I would probably run into my wall before I could get the 2.4 to be even slightly brighter than the 2.8, and even then, it might only match the 2.8 at that point.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #580 of 583 Old 02-01-2011, 07:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Thanks Toe. Maybe I'll get a sample.

I had what was close to a neutral gain screen and the HP. The HP was obviously brighter from my center seats, but from my side seats the neutral gain was obviously brighter.

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 online now  
post #581 of 583 Old 02-01-2011, 09:50 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Thanks Toe. Maybe I'll get a sample.

I had what was close to a neutral gain screen and the HP. The HP was obviously brighter from my center seats, but from my side seats the neutral gain was obviously brighter.
I dont doubt it........I can get my ST130 sample and HP to match up in brightness if I stand next to the side wall in my room.........If I had just a little more width, it would not even be as bright at the 130. I would be curious how the 2.4 does in your room since it definitely seems to not lose as much brightness at the extreme sides of my room vs the 2.8.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #582 of 583 Old 02-01-2011, 10:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post
I dont doubt it........I can get my ST130 sample and HP to match up in brightness if I stand next to the side wall in my room.........If I had just a little more width, it would not even be as bright at the 130. I would be curious how the 2.4 does in your room since it definitely seems to not lose as much brightness at the extreme sides of my room vs the 2.8.
This is of course one attractive feature of the 2.8 HP: it doesn't light up the side walls (and ceiling, if the pj is mounted low) as much as other screens, thus helping to minimize light reflected from these surfaces.
millerwill is online now  
post #583 of 583 Old 02-01-2011, 10:46 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

This is of course one attractive feature of the 2.8 HP: it doesn't light up the side walls (and ceiling, if the pj is mounted low) as much as other screens, thus helping to minimize light reflected from these surfaces.

I agree Millerwill and this is another thing I LOVE about this 2.8 vs my ST130 screen. When you combine the MUCH brighter 2.8 image and the fact that my room is not lighting up as much at the same time vs the 130, the end result is spectacular The room disappears better now than it did with my 130 which is amazing considering how much brighter the image is. For my particular setup the 2.8 is pretty ideal and I would not want the wider viewing angle of the 2.4 since I could not use it anyway (with my narrow viewing area) and all it would do is light my room up slightly more.

Having said that, I can certainly see certain room/setups where the 2.4 would be a better choice overall. Rooms where there is a wider viewing area I would think the 2.4 might be a better overall choice assuming you regularly have people sitting in those further off seats.

I do think DaLite should offer both screens though since they definitely have differences compared to one another and one might be better than the other depending on the room/situation.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
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