Originally Posted by mv038856
the review for the 4K material mentions two possible drawbacks of woven screen materials. One is the gain that might not be as high as advertized (or at least not comparable to figures of not-AT screens) and the light leakage within the screen material. I was wondering, how Center Stage XD measures in these categories?
I currently use a DA-Lite screen with DA-MAT High Contrast material which is specified with a gain of 0.85. I was hoping that with your screen material, I could boost brightness simply through its 1.2 gain. This, plus placing my projector (a JVC RS60) at max. zoom (going from a 2:1 to 1.4:1 projection ratio) and using a recently acquired ISCO III L lens should allow me to go from my 80" wide 16:9 screen to a 130" cinemascope curved screen with a Center Stage XD material, so I thought. In my calculations, I even ended up with a higher brightness on the bigger then AT screen taking higher gain, max. zoom and the anamorphic lens into acount. I therefore even considered using an even bigger screen. Since I enjoy 3D projection, light output clearly is an important factor. So, what's the non-AT-comparable gain of a Center Stage XD?
Assuming that the surface of a woven material might never be 100% plane, the idea that some light might be reflected sideways appears to be reasonable. Did you ever get feedback regarding that effect from a customer?
I do have a sample of the CSXD material, but I wouldn't know how I could measure its gain myself. When I taped the sample to my current screen some time ago, I didn't notice any sideways light leakage within the fabric.
Hi Markus -
I've measured the ANSI contrast ratio on a checkerboard pattern and the Center Stage XD was 99% of the reference solid target. Generally cross-pixel light interaction is a function of the thread coating and weave structure. The XD benefits by being both coated with vinyl and featuring a fairly flat weave.
When I measured SR their CP2 was about 92% ANSI of reference. While it benefits from a coated thread, they have a thicker multi-dimensional weave that can cause diffusion.
The Enlightor-4K has uncoated threads but an exceptionally flat weave surface. We've never had anyone detect an issue like in the review. It's possible that there were optical, lens, or panel issues that were more visible on our 4K screen versus his other screen on hand. Every screen will highlight or downplay various aspects of the projector's flavor and the room, which is why there are so many choices.
You can evaluate it for yourself by playing white credits on a black background.
Gain ratings aren't just all over the place with AT materials. In fact, look around at measurements of non-AT materials. Glancing through Jeff's chart, I see -27%, -28% and -59% of published ratings. I don't see a rating for the Da-Mat high contrast material, so I can't say what the comparitive difference would be between the XD and it. I'd recommend putting it up on your screen with something dark behind it, project on and let us know what you see.
Not taking benchmarks into consideration, the XD will measure in the .95 to 1.05 range. Benchmarks say it is 13-19% brighter than 1.1, and 15% brighter than 1.16. Benchmarked against the HP it is a 1.24 and against the Starbright 7 it is a 2.3.
Since you have a screen to compare it to, zoom it to about 97.5" wide for a 16:9 ratio 3D and with the sample up see if it's brighter or not and if that's a problem. If you need a 24x24, they are only $20.
I wouldn't pay much attention to FtL targets, as they vary wildly to all the equipment and personal preferences. Show me a system spec'd for a stackup of all the worst case issues such as bulb aging, and at the top of the range, and I'll show you a guy taking ibuprofen and wearing sunglasses.