Originally Posted by smithfarmer
My hat's off to you for the excellent job you've done so far in conveying your impressions on the performance of the HP. With that said, I believe the statement above may be a little over the top with regards to the HP vs. SS and I'm sorry to say that I'm having a great deal of difficulty with it.
Please don't take this the wrong way but I seriously can't understand how you could possibly evaluate the brightness uniformity of either brand with the small samples you have at your disposal. Could you please elaborate on this? Were you projecting a solid color or was it a mixed scene from a movie? Any further details you can provide on this are appreciated.
You're right, it's not fair for me to have made such statements without seeing a larger area of the SS screen.
Here's what I did: I placed the smaller HP sample over the larger SS sample and moved it around at different angles from the light source (both my Sharp 20000 with a frozen static snowy scene and an overhead light). Held this way, the HP sample was the larger part of the sample surface - roughly 75% vs 25% for the SS. In each case, it seemed to me that the HP sample maintained a uniform brightness, whether that was low gain or high gain - off axis from the projections lens or light source, or reflecting that source straight back. The SS, it seemed to me, displayed an uneven illumination. That contrast seemed more pronounced because I had the HP sample right on top of it. The edge to brightness varied from the SS to the HP, depending on the angle from the light, but the uniformity was maintained with the HP, and not the SS.
When I positioned the SS sample in front of my Firehawk, so that the entire surface of the SS sample could be compared to the Firehawk, I noticed a sheen on the SS sample. It was different than the Firehawk sheen (which is probably better described as a sparkly sheen). From my normal viewing distance of about 12', the sheen was noticeable on both.
Anyway, that is what I got from the samples I was sent. I know I preferred the overall look and uniformity of the HP to both the SS and my old Firehawk. I had no way of evaluating a larger surface for the SS, since I don't know anyone who has one, but I can say that my impression of the HP didn't change substantially from viewing the sample to seeing the 110" screen in place. Since the sheen was visible even on a very small SS sample to me, it seems unlikely it would be better with a larger sample.
Trying not to be over the top here. If you want a negative, I do think the viewing cone is quite small to realize the gain I want for my Sharp 20000, but I will be able to achieve it. I don't think a lot of people will be able to. Whether they will be happy may well depend on how bright their projector is. If I use my Sharp in low lamp/high contrast mode, it's more than acceptable in the cone, but much outside that cone and it's too dim.
That said, I see no downside for me so far. I really like the image, and I'm going to be able to get the brightness I want.