The official SeymourAV center stage screen thread! - Page 52 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 25Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1531 of 2789 Old 12-10-2011, 05:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

http://www.screenexcellence.com/uplo...ur-highres.pdf Widescreen Review's evaluation.

Thanks

That was a roller coaster of a read...I'm buying it, I'm not buying it, I'm buying it, I'm not buying it, I'm probably buying it

My projector should be here Monday so I'll project on the samples Chris was kind enough to have to me extremely quickly I might add unlike SoMe X company who hasn't even responded to me after multiple attempts to just get a sample

Chris, do you recommend I put a black backing on the material as I project a test image?


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.
Larry M is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1532 of 2789 Old 12-10-2011, 03:15 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry M View Post

Thanks

That was a roller coaster of a read...I'm buying it, I'm not buying it, I'm buying it, I'm not buying it, I'm probably buying it

My projector should be here Monday so I'll project on the samples Chris was kind enough to have to me extremely quickly I might add unlike SoMe X company who hasn't even responded to me after multiple attempts to just get a sample

Chris, do you recommend I put a black backing on the material as I project a test image?

You can also download the pdf from the US site here. It might be faster:
http://www.seymourscreenexcellence.com/press.asp

Definitely put something black behind the samples to evaluate them. That way you don't get light bounce-back which can create false artifacts.

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1533 of 2789 Old 12-11-2011, 05:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriscmore View Post

You can also download the pdf from the US site here. It might be faster:
http://www.seymourscreenexcellence.com/press.asp

Definitely put something black behind the samples to evaluate them. That way you don't get light bounce-back which can create false artifacts.

Cheers,
Chris

Thanks Chris, crossing my fingers the size I want looks great with the EN4K

I watched your YT video from 2011 Cedia and you mentioned the masking panels are both AT and non AT. The one you displayed was non AT, what does the AT one look like? Does the color vary from the screen frame material?


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.
Larry M is offline  
post #1534 of 2789 Old 12-11-2011, 06:00 PM
Member
 
ScottyH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beaumont, Ab
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I got my H115 screen up awhile back

Excellent quality! Assembly was easy. A minor wrinkle in the screen was gone within a day of being tensioned.

First row is about 10' away and what I see is a brilliant picture using my old HD750 projo. The pattern is only visible when about 5' away. Cant wait to use the X70 on it!

I will never use a non AT screen again. Amazing
ScottyH is online now  
post #1535 of 2789 Old 12-11-2011, 07:14 PM
Senior Member
 
secondhander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Hey Chris,

I built my DIY screen on the weekend, it turned out awesome, I have a very minor wrinkle in one corner (my own fault) I can easily fix but other than that I'm super happy with the screen material. I did some tests with the panny 4K and it's just brilliant. I posted a step by step of the weekends work with pics in my build thread. Took us quite a while to do and not as good as your DIY PDF file of instructions, but I got 'er done. Wrapping corners is hard stuff.

Cheers & thanks again


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
secondhander is offline  
post #1536 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 09:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mopar_Mudder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rice Lake, WI
Posts: 1,645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by secondhander View Post

Hey Chris,

I built my DIY screen on the weekend, it turned out awesome, I have a very minor wrinkle in one corner (my own fault) I can easily fix but other than that I'm super happy with the screen material. I did some tests with the panny 4K and it's just brilliant. I posted a step by step of the weekends work with pics in my build thread. Took us quite a while to do and not as good as your DIY PDF file of instructions, but I got 'er done. Wrapping corners is hard stuff.

Cheers & thanks again

Be ready to have to retension it again about 6 mounth or some. Mine was good and tight when I made it, then down to road it had some wrinkle either do to screen stretch or wood shrink, probably both. After restretching it has been good.


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.
Mopar_Mudder is offline  
post #1537 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 09:25 AM
Senior Member
 
secondhander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopar_Mudder View Post

Be ready to have to retension it again about 6 mounth or some. Mine was good and tight when I made it, then down to road it had some wrinkle either do to screen stretch or wood shrink, probably both. After restretching it has been good.

Thx for the heads up, I'll expect to have to do that then.

Cheers


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
secondhander is offline  
post #1538 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 11:39 AM
Member
 
mv038856's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by turls View Post


...the biggest thing I got out of the article was additional confirmation of what I've heard that gain numbers on weave screens are inflated. I think the reviewer ended up with about .7.

Hi Chris,

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.

Cheers!

Markus
mv038856 is offline  
post #1539 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mopar_Mudder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rice Lake, WI
Posts: 1,645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
The few reviews I have seen seem to put the XD material at closer to a 1.0 gain in the real world.

If Chris could come up with a 2.0 AT screen he could be a millionare

So get to work on that tongiht and see what you can come up with. Thread covered in tinny microscopic mirrors should do it "its in the mirrors".....


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.
Mopar_Mudder is offline  
post #1540 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 03:35 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mv038856 View Post

Hi Chris,

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.

Cheers!

Markus

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.

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1541 of 2789 Old 12-12-2011, 03:53 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopar_Mudder View Post

If Chris could come up with a 2.0 AT screen he could be a millionare

Benchmarked against the Starbright 7, we're already past that at 2.3.

You want that in an unbenchmarked rating? Eek, not sure if you'd like to look at mirrors, but anything's possible.

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1542 of 2789 Old 12-13-2011, 05:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriscmore View Post

Benchmarked against the Starbright 7, we're already past that at 2.3.

You want that in an unbenchmarked rating? Eek, not sure if you'd like to look at mirrors, but anything's possible.

Cheers,
Chris

I watched your YT video from 2011 Cedia and you mentioned the masking panels are both AT and non AT. The one you displayed was non AT, what does the AT one look like? Does the color vary from the screen frame material?


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.
Larry M is offline  
post #1543 of 2789 Old 12-13-2011, 03:22 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry M View Post

I watched your YT video from 2011 Cedia and you mentioned the masking panels are both AT and non AT. The one you displayed was non AT, what does the AT one look like? Does the color vary from the screen frame material?

Yes the AT material is a black woven material. In a lit up room it's much less black than the non-AT velvet we put on the leading edge to absorb the overscan pixels. In a dark room, it looks completely black.

Pictures are on this page:
http://www.seymourav.com/screensfixed.asp

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1544 of 2789 Old 12-13-2011, 04:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriscmore View Post

Yes the AT material is a black woven material. In a lit up room it's much less black than the non-AT velvet we put on the leading edge to absorb the overscan pixels. In a dark room, it looks completely black.

Pictures are on this page:
http://www.seymourav.com/screensfixed.asp

Cheers,
Chris

Thanks Chris

If my speakers are between the masking panels, does it matter if I don't go with the AT version?


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.
Larry M is offline  
post #1545 of 2789 Old 12-14-2011, 07:35 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry M View Post

Thanks Chris

If my speakers are between the masking panels, does it matter if I don't go with the AT version?

Nope. If your speakers are not behind the panels you can get either type.

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1546 of 2789 Old 12-28-2011, 03:21 PM
Member
 
mv038856's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriscmore View Post

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.

Cheers,
Chris

Hi Chris,

thanks for the reply!

I dug a little in one of my drawers and found my Spyder3 color sensor. Using the ColorHCFR software, I did some measurements with my Da-Lite DA-MAT HighContrast and the 20"x20" CenterStageXD sample I had acquired some time ago.

I don't know if the way I did the comparison is valid, but that's how I did it...

I ran the primary and secondary color measurements on both screen surfaces. ColorHCFR shows for every color the ftL, among other things. While I couldn't interpret the absolute ftL values, the relative ftL values looked interesting. The ftL values vary between colors (white of course being the 'color' with the highest value), the brightest having a ftL value more than 11 times that of the darkest (blue). What was surprising to me was that the ftL values of the CenterStageXD were at least twice as high, compared to the corresponding color ftLs from my DA-MAT HighContrast screen.

If I translate that into a relative gain rating between the two surfaces, the CenterStageXD would get a 1.6 (!) gain rating, compared to the brightness of the now officially 0.8 rated DA-MAT HighContrast surface.

Is my thinking correct here? Is ftL a linear scale? When I received the sample, I only used it on film material. Now that I projected test patterns on it, the increase in brightness is much more apparent.

Twice the brightness would mean, I can double the screen surface. All other factors (e.g. zoom factor) fixed, I could go from my 80"x45" 16:9 screen to a 112"x63" 16:9 screen (3600 sqinch to 7056 sqinch) without loosing brightness. If I went for a C130 or C140 with 54.9" resp. 59.1" screen height, I would expect a 16:9 image to be 10 to 20% brighter (5350 resp. 6200 sqinch). Using a high quality anamorpic lens, like my ISCO IIIL, I should be able to get most of the light energy "stretched" into the cinemascope format. Since the C130s/C140s cinemascope screen surface exceeds the 7200 sqinch (twice my current screen surface of 3600 sqinch), the brightness would be lower. Since I have to reduce the throw ratio anyway (the room simply isn't long enough...), going from a throw ratio of 1.8 to 1.4 should increase brightness by another 20%, making screen surfaces of up to 8640 sqinch as bright as my current screen. Therefore, a C130 with its 7740 sqinch screen surface should be safe, even a C140 with 8970 sqinch should not be recognizably darker. Again, is my thinking here correct?

Thanks!

Markus
mv038856 is offline  
post #1547 of 2789 Old 12-28-2011, 11:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brad Horstkotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 5,120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Just a thought - when you measured, was the CenterStage material in front of your (non-AT) screen? If so, that could make it appear brighter than it is (weave holes are reflecting light back that they ordinarily wouldn't).


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.
|
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.
| Xbox Live: Atomic Hamper
Brad Horstkotte is offline  
post #1548 of 2789 Old 12-29-2011, 02:46 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
chriscmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IA
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mv038856 View Post

Hi Chris,

thanks for the reply!

I dug a little in one of my drawers and found my Spyder3 color sensor. Using the ColorHCFR software, I did some measurements with my Da-Lite DA-MAT HighContrast and the 20"x20" CenterStageXD sample I had acquired some time ago.

I don't know if the way I did the comparison is valid, but that's how I did it...

I ran the primary and secondary color measurements on both screen surfaces. ColorHCFR shows for every color the ftL, among other things. While I couldn't interpret the absolute ftL values, the relative ftL values looked interesting. The ftL values vary between colors (white of course being the 'color' with the highest value), the brightest having a ftL value more than 11 times that of the darkest (blue). What was surprising to me was that the ftL values of the CenterStageXD were at least twice as high, compared to the corresponding color ftLs from my DA-MAT HighContrast screen.

If I translate that into a relative gain rating between the two surfaces, the CenterStageXD would get a 1.6 (!) gain rating, compared to the brightness of the now officially 0.8 rated DA-MAT HighContrast surface.

Is my thinking correct here? Is ftL a linear scale? When I received the sample, I only used it on film material. Now that I projected test patterns on it, the increase in brightness is much more apparent.

Twice the brightness would mean, I can double the screen surface. All other factors (e.g. zoom factor) fixed, I could go from my 80"x45" 16:9 screen to a 112"x63" 16:9 screen (3600 sqinch to 7056 sqinch) without loosing brightness. If I went for a C130 or C140 with 54.9" resp. 59.1" screen height, I would expect a 16:9 image to be 10 to 20% brighter (5350 resp. 6200 sqinch). Using a high quality anamorpic lens, like my ISCO IIIL, I should be able to get most of the light energy "stretched" into the cinemascope format. Since the C130s/C140s cinemascope screen surface exceeds the 7200 sqinch (twice my current screen surface of 3600 sqinch), the brightness would be lower. Since I have to reduce the throw ratio anyway (the room simply isn't long enough...), going from a throw ratio of 1.8 to 1.4 should increase brightness by another 20%, making screen surfaces of up to 8640 sqinch as bright as my current screen. Therefore, a C130 with its 7740 sqinch screen surface should be safe, even a C140 with 8970 sqinch should not be recognizably darker. Again, is my thinking here correct?

Thanks!

Markus

Hi Markus -

Generally what you're measuring sounds correct. If the XD has the exact same color temperature as the Da-Mat, the you'd see the FtL measurements scale the same for each color. Or if you can take an RGB or color temp measurement of white, they'd be the same. Your gain measurement is higher than the "range of reality," a happy place I like to stay in where reality checks from other materials and experiences exist. Gray surfaces aren't used as reference targets because not only are they hard to get as perfect, but they will result in less accurate calculations when your reference is in the denominator. Going up from low swings the results more, like when projectors start getting into the million+ contrast ratings, even though the difference in the denominator is 0.000001 FtL, or otherwise invisible.

FtL is a linear scale (lumen / sq. ft), but how the eye perceives brightness is not linear. Therefore, 10FtL does not appear half as bright as 20FtL.

So, while technically twice the brightness would allow you to double the screen area, keep in mind what FtL is your reference target for what is comfortable for you in your experience. Measure FtL with white on the Da-Mat, then the XD, and you'll know how many sq. in. you can scale an XD screen and keep the FtL the same.

Lastly, viewing angle is for most folks a more important aspect than luminance. You're talking a wide range here, from your current 80" wide 1.78 to a possible 140" wide scope image. Maybe hanging up a couple sheets or temporary surfaces and running a quick range of content will have you narrow down what you want.

Cheers,
Chris

Seymour AV
Seymour-Screen Excellence
chriscmore is offline  
post #1549 of 2789 Old 12-30-2011, 04:11 PM
Member
 
NORLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
This question might have been ask earlier, but I could not find it on the forums;

What is the difference, if any, between the Seymour AV Center Stage XD material and the Enlightor 4K used in the Seymour Screen Excellence? Is it the same material under different brand names?
NORLL is offline  
post #1550 of 2789 Old 12-31-2011, 04:52 AM
 
BobL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 53
No they are not the same, the XD is similar to the Enlightor 2K.
BobL is offline  
post #1551 of 2789 Old 12-31-2011, 05:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by NORLL View Post

This question might have been ask earlier, but I could not find it on the forums;

What is the difference, if any, between the Seymour AV Center Stage XD material and the Enlightor 4K used in the Seymour Screen Excellence? Is it the same material under different brand names?

Very different materials

I have both samples in my under construction theater.

From a touch/feel/see perspective the XD is a vinyl like material with visible weaves and pattern in a bright white color. The EN4K is a soft fabric material with no visible weave but does have an odd pattern and is an off white color (gray tint when compared to the XD)

When projected on (RS45) the XD is considerebly brighter. There is a clear difference in brightness between the 2. I can't say one is sharper than the other. On bright white scenes the XD was a bit overpowering and if you're looking for it, you can see the weave at about 15ft. Under regular scenes I could not see the weave pattern on the XD until I was 3-5 ft away if at all. The EN4K under bright scenes was not overpowering nor could you see the pattern up close or at seating distance.


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.
Larry M is offline  
post #1552 of 2789 Old 12-31-2011, 06:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 6,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry M View Post

Very different materials

I have both samples in my under construction theater.

From a touch/feel/see perspective the XD is a vinyl like material with visible weaves and pattern in a bright white color. The EN4K is a soft fabric material with no visible weave but does have an odd pattern and is an off white color (gray tint when compared to the XD)

When projected on (RS45) the XD is considerebly brighter. There is a clear difference in brightness between the 2. I can't say one is sharper than the other. On bright white scenes the XD was a bit overpowering and if you're looking for it, you can see the weave at about 15ft. Under regular scenes I could not see the weave pattern on the XD until I was 3-5 ft away if at all. The EN4K under bright scenes was not overpowering nor could you see the pattern up close or at seating distance.

I am going to have to disagree with that. My eyes aren't 20/20 anymore and I can see the weave at IIRC 8 ft. If I get a chance, then I would like to retest, but that is what I remember. The EN4k is essentially a solid screen. Steve Smith and I thought we were looking at a solid screen when we walked up to it at Cedia. I think until Cris told us we didn't know that it was AT. The EN4K and the SMX 4k screens are the first AT screens that I have seen that I would not have any problem using instead of a solid screen.

Call AVS For the Best Deals!!!


My new favorite game is Stop the Bots
Ericglo is offline  
post #1553 of 2789 Old 12-31-2011, 08:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Posts: 1,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ericglo View Post

I am going to have to disagree with that. My eyes aren't 20/20 anymore and I can see the weave at IIRC 8 ft. If I get a chance, then I would like to retest, but that is what I remember. The EN4k is essentially a solid screen. Steve Smith and I thought we were looking at a solid screen when we walked up to it at Cedia. I think until Cris told us we didn't know that it was AT. The EN4K and the SMX 4k screens are the first AT screens that I have seen that I would not have any problem using instead of a solid screen.

I guess if you're really looking for the weave you can see it from a few feet away on the XD, but I have 20/20 and didn't notice it at 15ft. Please note this is while watching a movie.

The EN4K does look solid, but it is not a smooth screen nor is the texture at all visible during movie watching


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.
Larry M is offline  
post #1554 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 06:36 AM
Member
 
mv038856's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Horstkotte View Post

Just a thought - when you measured, was the CenterStage material in front of your (non-AT) screen? If so, that could make it appear brighter than it is (weave holes are reflecting light back that they ordinarily wouldn't).

Hi,

I did two measurements, one with the sample directly in front of the Da-Lite Screen and one with black velvet behind the sample. The measurements did not differ significantly. In fact, the measurements with the velvet behind the sample were even slightly higher...which doesn't make sense to me. Therefore, I classified the difference as "measurements tolerances".

Cheers!

Markus
mv038856 is offline  
post #1555 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 06:48 AM
Member
 
mv038856's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriscmore View Post

Hi Markus -
Lastly, viewing angle is for most folks a more important aspect than luminance. You're talking a wide range here, from your current 80" wide 1.78 to a possible 140" wide scope image. Maybe hanging up a couple sheets or temporary surfaces and running a quick range of content will have you narrow down what you want.

Cheers,
Chris

Chris,

I simulated the vieving angle by moving closer to the screen, up to one screen width. I did like the immersion into the picture, especially with 3D material.

In contrast to the discussion that is currently going on in this thread, I didn't notice the weave of the XD sample at 6 ft distance when watching a movie. It is just strange, having a bright and more brilliant square in your screen...

Unfortunately, my new home theater (with the big AT screen) won't be realized within the next 6 month or so... Maybe, there will be a 4K AT material with a gain comparable to the XD when my screen order is due.

Cheers!

Markus
mv038856 is offline  
post #1556 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 07:19 AM
Senior Member
 
DouglasCleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ericglo View Post

I am going to have to disagree with that. My eyes aren't 20/20 anymore and I can see the weave at IIRC 8 ft. If I get a chance, then I would like to retest, but that is what I remember. The EN4k is essentially a solid screen. Steve Smith and I thought we were looking at a solid screen when we walked up to it at Cedia. I think until Cris told us we didn't know that it was AT. The EN4K and the SMX 4k screens are the first AT screens that I have seen that I would not have any problem using instead of a solid screen.

I like the screen with my RS2 but I can see the weave at 11ft on bright areas in scenes. Watching a hockey game, for example, I can definitely see the weave. I would still buy it again, great screen for the price.
DouglasCleary is offline  
post #1557 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 08:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mopar_Mudder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rice Lake, WI
Posts: 1,645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Same here I can see the weave at 9' on white scenes when I look for it, don't know if anyone else does. EN4K would be cool but not worth it for the price difference, until a + gain AT screen comes out I don't see me switching.


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.
Mopar_Mudder is offline  
post #1558 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 08:22 AM
Senior Member
 
secondhander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I can slightly see the diagonal weave in white scenes only (From about 10' away, nothing further) but it's not a distraction to me, only a tad when watching hockey games as it's the only content I tend to watch that's mostly white throughout. It's something you only can notice though if you know it's there otherwise even if you did see it you'd think it's just some grain or maybe some slight pixelation if anything.. It's a superb product though and I wouldn't trade it for anything.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
secondhander is offline  
post #1559 of 2789 Old 01-02-2012, 07:43 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,742
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 372 Post(s)
Liked: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCleary View Post

I like the screen with my RS2 but I can see the weave at 11ft on bright areas in scenes. Watching a hockey game, for example, I can definitely see the weave. I would still buy it again, great screen for the price.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopar_Mudder View Post

Same here I can see the weave at 9' on white scenes when I look for it, don't know if anyone else does. EN4K would be cool but not worth it for the price difference, until a + gain AT screen comes out I don't see me switching.

From 11.5' I could see the weave every now and then on panning scenes of things like clouds. Since I wanted to reduce my viewing distance (10' to a 106" diag.) I switched to the Enlightor 4K. I am very pleased with the image and the brightness. I am using a JVC RS45 in normal (low) lamp with the iris closed all the way down. The image is very bright (65 hours on lamp).

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Brands we sell: 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 
Call for B-stock projectors
Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI, Falcon & many more.
RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Technology, MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech.
AV Science Sales 5 is online now  
post #1560 of 2789 Old 01-03-2012, 11:08 AM
Member
 
Martin G's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mike- I am planning a 120" wide 2.37 Enlightor 4K screen. 18 ft throw distance, seating 9 ft and 14 ft. Do you think the JVC RS 45/55 has enough lumens? What other PJ would you recommend with this size AT screen with a lower gain?
Martin G is offline  
Reply Screens

Tags
Seymour Av

User Tag List
chriscmore

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