Stewart cinema perf very obvious - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 11 Old 06-11-2000, 01:48 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Jmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Eagle, ID, USA
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just got back from a vacation to the east caribbean-boarded on the beautiful Zaandam where I was able to see several movies on a Stewart cinema perf (not the micro-perf), and let me tell you that I could definately see the holes at 10 feet. These holes seem to disappear at about 14 feet.

Elsewhere in this forum, a member was adamant about the cinema perf being superior to the microperf. I asked Stewart to send me one of each. The swatches received do not justify the whole picture. Although I have not seen the microperf in action, it has to be better than the cinema perf. The projector used was a Barco LCD (quite large and had single lens). LCD's have been known to have an ill effect when combined with perforated screens. For me, using a Dila, and viewing distance of 12 feet-the cinema perf is not the answere.

[This message has been edited by Jmartin (edited June 11, 2000).]
Jmartin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 11 Old 06-12-2000, 05:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LeeAntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Lynbrook,NY,USA
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am also a defender of the Cinema Perf screen. But in my posts I did warn the readers that you need to be seated 14 feet from the screen to have the perfs dissappear.

The micro perf screen will make everything look " metallic" so if this is the look you want, go right ahead.

Is there somethin about your HT that prevents you from moving back 2 feet?

Lee
LeeAntin is offline  
post #3 of 11 Old 06-12-2000, 01:49 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Jmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Eagle, ID, USA
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Lee:
Yes, its the back wall of our living room.....what do you mean by metallic??

Jaime
Jmartin is offline  
post #4 of 11 Old 06-12-2000, 03:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LeeAntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Lynbrook,NY,USA
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jamie,

The "THX" approved Micro-Perf Screen from Stewart has two big drawbacks...in my opinion:

1. Almost 50% of the light projected on the screen goes through the screen

2. The colors have a metal look hence metallic. I am not sure that the gain of the MP screen has ever been given out. Does anyone know what it is?
The colors look unnatural. I would almost swear that the gain is higher than 4 to compensate for the loss of light.

These are the observations I made when i first saw it at the 1997 CES show in Vegas.

Do yourself a favor...go see one before you buy it...even if it means getting on an airplane.

If it was so wonderful, you would think that highend video salons would use it...but they don't. That should tell you something about the image quality.

Lee
LeeAntin is offline  
post #5 of 11 Old 06-12-2000, 11:52 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Jmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Eagle, ID, USA
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Lee,

thanx for the info. Boy, I guess I'm really stuck between a rock and a hard place! Cant move back to increase my viewing distance in order to enjoy the cinema-perf, and sounds like the micro-perf may not be the way to go, and I have no place for speakers below the screen....maybe I can place all three speakers above the screen and have a solid screen with perforated black drop! Lee, do you know of any favorable characteristics of other perforated screens-one which may work for me?? I still feel that locating the speaker behind the screen is best. Before I scrape the idea of having a perforated screen, maybe another manufacturer may have something which will work...any comments?

thanx....Jaime
Jmartin is offline  
post #6 of 11 Old 06-13-2000, 05:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LeeAntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Lynbrook,NY,USA
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jaime,

unfortunately the Stewart Cinema Perf has the smallest holes of any of the perf screens.

What is the distance from the screen wall to the viewing wall? Can you move either wall back 2 feet? Is it just the center channel that is giving you the problem? How big of a screen were you thinking of installing? Will you be using a fixed or rollup screen? How much room is there above the proposed screen to the ceiling? What is behind the screen wall? What is behind the viewing wall?

Jamie, if you answer the above questions we can come up with some logical solution.

Lee
LeeAntin is offline  
post #7 of 11 Old 06-13-2000, 02:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dean McManis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Santa Clara, CA USA
Posts: 1,600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jaime,

From the posts here and elsewhere I was concerned about going with a perforated screen. The stories of extra light loss, and moire patterns, low frequency waves from full range speakers distorting the picture, and the screen masking the high frequency audio from the speakers.

I got a 180" DaLite AudioVision 16:9 screen to go with my G10 D-ILA FPTV and ISCO lens combo.

Happily, the ISCO provides the extra brightness to support a large unity gain AT screen, and it eliminates visible pixels from any viewing distance, so there are no moire issues at all. I have seen no distortion from low frequency vibrations on the screen, and the high frequency quality is excellent (no more attenuation than the speaker grills).

I have seating at 8' and 15'. Although I can make out the perforations at 8 feet when you see a white field (if you are looking for them), they are not really visible during a movie.

A bigger consideration is that the AT screen is closer to the viewer and projector to allow for the speakers to be located behind.the screen. For me, this took away 2+ feet from the HT area.

Still, I'm very happy overall with the DaLite AT screen as the sound is clear, and located where the picture is, and the front speakers being hidden actually gives a much cleaner look and a more spacious feel despite the smaller actual HT area.

I can understand why dealers don't have perforated screens though. There is no way that a dealer would have gorgeous $$$ speakers and hide then behind a screen. They probably sell 4 times as many speakers as projection systems. Plus most dealers have CRT FPTVs and therefore cannot afford have a larger screen, and even more light lost to the perforated material.

It was a bit of a risk spending hundreds of dollars on my DaLite AT screen, but I wouldn't have risked the thousands of dollars on a Stewart AT screen, regardless of the benefits.

-Dean.
Dean McManis is offline  
post #8 of 11 Old 06-14-2000, 10:01 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Jmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Eagle, ID, USA
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dean, Thank you kindly for your review of your setup as this is invaluable to me at this stage. Sounds like you are very happy with your Dalite. Did you A-B the Dalite with the Stewart Cinema perf?? If you did, was the image so close in comparison that the cost of the screen was the deciding factor? What are your thoughts comparing the Dalite to the cinema perf?

Lee: I hope this doesn't confuse you,

First, my projector is the Dukane 9015,mated with the ISCO. Together they measure at 18inch. (1.5ft)
Second, I would like a 120inch wide 16:9 (10ft wide[not 10ft diag])perf if possibe

Now the proposed calculations: Given Mark Foster's recommendations of 3.5 times the image height (67.5inch) this would yield a throw distance of 236inch. Now add the length of the 9015/isco yields 254inch(21ft). So, it appears I require a total of 21ft of space between the screen and the back of the 9015 to be able to use a 10ft screen.

I don't have a dedicated room for this HT, So I'm using my family room.
The distance between the front wall (where the screen will go) and the rear wall (back of sofa) is 224inch (18.7ft). Looks like I'm just over 2ft short. I havent foregotten the required space for the front speakers-fortunately, I have three evenly spaced large art nitches BEHIND the front wall where I can house my M&K S-150's flush with the wall!

Our viewing position while sitting in the sofa to the front wall is 192inch (16ft). Well, maybe I can use the cinema perf!

I don't know how much space between ceiling and second floor-I guess it would be about 12inch?? My ceiling is 10ft tall. I will be using an electric roll-up screen.

Now that I have done this exercise, I see clearly (no pun intended)that I can use the cinema perf. Now my other problem to attack is that throw distance. If I use the 10ft wide screen, just how much pincushing/distortion will I see with the 9015 set at 3.05 times the image height (as apposed to the recommended 3.5)?

I know I can go with a smaller screen......but I already have a big screen TV! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

Thanx a million.......Jaime
Jmartin is offline  
post #9 of 11 Old 06-14-2000, 11:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LeeAntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Lynbrook,NY,USA
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jamie,

I see no problem with using the Stewart Cinema perf screen. You said you measured 16 feet from the screen wall to the couch. Is that measurement to the front of the couch or to the back of the couch because you really have to measure the distance from where your eyes will be.

All you need is 14 feet and I do believe that you have this required measurement. That is going to be one big screen from your viewing distance. I thought I had a big screen (107 inches) and I sit back 18 feet from my screen.

You say you can mount the speakers flush into the screen wall and use a rollup to fall in fromn of them. The rollup will take only a few inches.

Go with the Stewart Cinema Perf. You can choose gains of 1.3, 1.5 or 2.0 in the white series.

Good luck and tell us how you make out.

Lee
LeeAntin is offline  
post #10 of 11 Old 06-14-2000, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dean McManis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Santa Clara, CA USA
Posts: 1,600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jaime,

I measured my HT and the screen is 19'6" from the front fo the ISCO lens. My Close seating is 8' away (sitting back), and my main seating is 14'6"(sitting back) to the eyes. From my projector distance I can zoom down to a 10' wide image easily.

Having a 10' wide screen will improve two issues that I have with the ISCO. First, the zoomed out image will fill a smaller area of the lens which will reduce distortion/pincushioning somewhat, and also you won't run into the lens-image size cropping the corners of the image (dimming the edges of the screen). This can be tempered, but it is a fine balance.

There is some pincushioning which amounts to about 3" on the edge on my screen. I will have a 4" felt border to mitigate this effect, but the pincushioning is mostly lost off screen, especially if you use a HTPC with YXY and desktop blanking.

I have YXY locate the 2.35:1 widescreen picture at the top of the screen which cuts off the top pincushion effect and is easier to watch. With a motorized screen, you could set this up and just lower your screen to a 2.35:1 size.

My size perforated screen required a horizontal seam, but it's not really visible except for white fields like snow scenes, and is not lit up when I watch 2.35:1 movies. I don't know if you will have that seam issue with the Stewart perforated motorized screen, it was not an issue with my last Draper M2500 screen.

I did not even consider the Stewart perforated screen, other than getting pricing. I looked at the Draper AT1200 material, but could only get framed Draper and Stewart screens. Whereas I was able to get the DaLite screen material unframed for much less money. The Draper was 3X my screen price, and the Stewart perf was 8X the cost. No doubt that price diffeential was a consequence of the larger screen size.

If money was not an issue, I'd happily get a Stewart screen.
I have a couple friends with Stewart motorized screens (non-perforated) and they look very good except for faint roll-up horizontal creases which are about as visible as my seam (not normally seen except for white field scenes).

-Dean.
Dean McManis is offline  
post #11 of 11 Old 06-14-2000, 04:40 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Jmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Eagle, ID, USA
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Lee, Dean, and Peter(panaramax):
I think I will go ahead with the regular cinema perf based on this review. I feel more comfortable purchasing it now that I have more "knowledge". Now the only obstacle I need to tackle is the throw distance of 3.05 times the image height. Do you guys think this will result in horrendous pincushion/distortion?

[This message has been edited by Jmartin (edited June 14, 2000).]
Jmartin is offline  
Closed Thread 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