Room dimensions--14 1/2' x 27'
Bottom of screen--50" above floor (high mount to fit above wooden wainscote
Sony VW10HT ceiling mount
My first M2500 screen fabric was returned due to excessive imprinting (it looked like there were bicycle tire tread marks all over. My wife said it looked like the quilt pattern on some toilet tissue rolls. It also had a puffy crease.) It also had some vetical white lines in bright sceens.
My second M2500 had a consistant surface and was used for about 75 hours. It showed many green or magenta splotches across a white field (could be the projector) and a 3' wide oval hot spot on dark screen (this extended about 1/3 of the way down from the top and moved to the left when I went to the left side of the room, and moved to the right when I went to the right side of the room--could be the projector.)
Picture always looked a bit grainy with this M2500. Walking up to screen showed blurred pixels (but projector was well focused and picture looked sharp from viewing distance.)
On very bright white or light blue sky sceens, I always saw a darker pattern behind the picture. It always looked like the picture was on a screen surface. This was an inner texture of the screen. If you were projecting on a white wall that had some off white stucco patches--it was similar to this patchwork showing through beneath the picture. This was the most annoying feature of this screen material.
The M1300: arrived rolled on a tube because I had to request it that way. Otherwise it comes folded in a box.
The many green and magenta blotches on the white field--gone.
The oval hot spot--gone.
Walking up to screen reveals thousands of perfectly spaced tiny square pixels.
The picture is smoother lending it a more focused or sharper, in fact, razor sharp, look.
The screen texture behind the piucture of bright sceens--gone. I now have a perfectly involving and smooth picture.
Advantages of M2500. When I watch from about 4pm to 8 pm in my not light controlled California light filled room, the picture is veary watchable due to the increased color satuaration. (But in the dark of night, the colors were often too much and not natural.)
That's about the only advantage I awas able to find with the M2500.
The M1300 does not have the bounce off the screen colors and presents a less watchable picture during the day. But at night, the colors are vibrant and more natural.
The M2500 seemed to magnify whatever imperfections were in the projector or movie source.
The M1300 has helped my Sony VW10HT live up to its most positive reviews. My blotchy skin tones are gone. My picture is now razor sharp. My hot spot is gone. My colors are wonderful and natural.
I'm sorry that I had ever heard of the M2500 high gain screen surface. Long live the M1300.
Farewell Voom. Farewell Directv. Farewell Bell Express Vu. Farewell Dish.
Had 6 dishes, now none.
Back to Comcast. Farewell Comcast, now back to Dish 120+HD. Farewell Dish.
Returned to Comcast 06/2012.
Back in the early days, there were just HD demo loops, no programming. Now HD 3D, amazing!
I'm sorry that you had such bad luck with your M2500 screens.
I had a 120" 16:9 M2500 fixed screen and it was Great!
But, mine was one of the earlier batches. I had no vertical streaking and no tire treads. I originally used it with an older FPTV with 7" CRTs and it was able to provide a easily watchable picture on that screen size even with only 140 ANSI lumens output.
Then I got a Sony 1292Q FPTV with 9" CRTs with twice the light output and the M2500 again looked great with a far brighter picture. But I could now see some color shifting when watching B&W movies. The hotspotting was visible but minimal.
In flat fields like sky or snow I could see some mild screen texture, but it was about the same as my previous Da Lite CinemaVision 1.3 gain screen.
Then I got my current G10 D-ILA FPTV which has the same light output as your Sony VPL-VW10HT, and after adjusting down the brightness controls it looked the best that I had seen it, with a bright image that I could watch easily with all of the lights on. I had no hotspotting, or color blotches. I could easily discern each pixel from up close, and there were no visible patches from any distance.
I have since gotten a new screen. It wasn't because of any shortcoming in the Draper M2500 material, but because I wanted to try a perforated screen and Draper only makes their AT1200 material, which is expensive, as is the Stewart perforated screen material. So I ended up getting the DaLite AudioVision screen (1.0 gain). I miss a bit of the bright colors and contrast that my M2500 screen brought me, but there does seem to be a bit more detail with the lower gain screen, and of course the accoustic transparency is cool for asthetics and better sound location.
From my limited experience, the M2500 is still the best looking hi-gain screen that I've seen, but as your experience points out, if they can't make the screen without coating problems and material surface flaws then the value of the high gain screen is lost, and then it's a better bet to go with a standard 1.3 gain screen.