Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 115 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #3421 of 10094 Old 11-03-2012, 10:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
BOBCAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Nice review Joe!
I really like mine.
I better sell the 93 quick before the 103's floods the market!
BOBCAT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3422 of 10094 Old 11-03-2012, 03:26 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 21,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOBCAT View Post

Nice review Joe!
I really like mine.
I better sell the 93 quick before the 103's floods the market!

Hey thanks. smile.gif

Search or copy and paste-> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com <-to check out my latest Reviews.

Check out these new Lighted Cup Holders:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1402680301175
joerod is offline  
post #3423 of 10094 Old 11-03-2012, 04:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post


Hey thanks. smile.gif


Well, I have not doubt that the Oppo103 a superb product.   I had an Oppo83 and loved it, but sold it for an almost even cost for a Sony790 in order to have something that can do 3d (which I really don't care for!) and also networking capabilities.   I'm sure the Oppo 103 is a finer product than the Sony790, but the 4k upconversion to the Sony1000 is irrelevant, since the 1000 beasts them both.     

 

So I'm just going to stand pat with the BD player I now have (Sony790) until we have 4k BD's.    If it's an Oppo, that would be nice!

millerwill is online now  
post #3424 of 10094 Old 11-03-2012, 10:47 PM
Senior Member
 
RevelMN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 245
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Has anybody tried an ISCO or Prismasonic with there 1000. I seem to remember one guy was going to, but I think he sold the lens before he got the 1000. I know you should use a 4K rated A-lens, but I am curious how it would actually compare using current A-lens?

I use the ISCO lll and love it. I use the CineSlide sled, I can switch between lens in /out in just over a second.
RevelMN is offline  
post #3425 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 03:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SOWK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wauwatosa, WI
Posts: 3,899
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 83
JoeRod... Nice to see you finally used my advice and paint the front screen wall area all black... smile.gif I love the new look. And I'm sure you do too. Great job on the black out curtains and the black ceiling as well.
SOWK is offline  
post #3426 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 05:13 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 21,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOWK View Post

JoeRod... Nice to see you finally used my advice and paint the front screen wall area all black... smile.gif I love the new look. And I'm sure you do too. Great job on the black out curtains and the black ceiling as well.

Thanks. I spent a couple days working hard down there. Listened to Painted Black while I did it. And you were absolutely right. It looks amazing now. I am contemplating selling my red chairs soon (for cheap) and going black. Thanks for the suggestion. smile.gif

Search or copy and paste-> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com <-to check out my latest Reviews.

Check out these new Lighted Cup Holders:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1402680301175
joerod is offline  
post #3427 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 05:29 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevelMN View Post

I use the ISCO lll and love it. I use the CineSlide sled, I can switch between lens in /out in just over a second.

So you do not see any image loss when using the lens? I was guessing that people would not see an image loss.

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales
Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me: Mike@AVScience.com

Brands we sell: http://avscience.com/brands/

 

Call for B-stock projectors

Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI & many more.
Klipsch, RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Technology, MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech.

AV Science Sales 5 is online now  
post #3428 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 06:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 293
Hi Mike. i don't understand how one could visually measure or observe image loss using such a set up or for that matter visually measure or observe loss or gain over switching to zoom. Aa better question would be to request the poster to do an A/B using both methods and to report the differences. I doubt with the Sony 1000ES there would be any to the casual observer. Obviously, the ISCO set up would use all the pixels and therefor would be a brighter picture if without it you couldn't get enough brightness. The ISCO is not a 4K lens but I doubt most would observe it to be defficient perhaps unless they were to do very careful A/B for detail sharpness. The problem with an A/B would also be inadvertant bias, liking what you have invested in over concluding that it might be better without all the extra stuff. In any event I am reasonably sure with or without great results would be achieved, that there are pluses and ,minuses to both and I am sure that careful observation will reveal some negatives to PQ using the ISCO, namely some loss of detail sharpness when using the Sony, a minor loss in ANSI contrast, and some geometric distortion, pincushioning, one can get rid of by overscaning slightly BUT by definition overscan results in a loss of picture.

I would be amazed in the net gain in using the ISCO set up, if there were a net gain over using zoom, would justify the substantial investment required. nOf course if one could validly conclude a net beneit, then one could chase improvement by spending if one has it to spend.

i think it more likely that a 1000ES owner already has the ISCO set up and then the question becomes why not use it. To me that would require a very very careful A/B.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #3429 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 04:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Joe, great review on the 103! I can now see the benefits of new deeper feature set diffs from the 93. I think I am going to have to invest in one for sure.

In other news, I've officially jumped ship from my Integra 80.3 this weekend to a Denon 4520. 4K passthrough to my VW1000 is now functional via 4520 (well slightly glitchy possibly related to the cable run to projector) from my HTPC and I've finally solved HDMI intermittent audio dropouts from HTPC, which may have even been thanks to a registry tweak as I was still getting them in a less pronounced form, exacerbated whenever the PC wasn't playing in 'fullscreen' mode with the 4520. Sonically the XT32 sounds pretty much identical. They share the same model Audessey mic - even used my already tripod mounted one from the 80.3 to save time.

OzHDHT is offline  
post #3430 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 07:03 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 21,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzHDHT View Post

Joe, great review on the 103! I can now see the benefits of new deeper feature set diffs from the 93. I think I am going to have to invest in one for sure.
In other news, I've officially jumped ship from my Integra 80.3 this weekend to a Denon 4520. 4K passthrough to my VW1000 is now functional via 4520 (well slightly glitchy possibly related to the cable run to projector) from my HTPC and I've finally solved HDMI intermittent audio dropouts from HTPC, which may have even been thanks to a registry tweak as I was still getting them in a less pronounced form, exacerbated whenever the PC wasn't playing in 'fullscreen' mode with the 4520. Sonically the XT32 sounds pretty much identical. They share the same model Audessey mic - even used my already tripod mounted one from the 80.3 to save time.

Thanks. I have had a lot of fun playing with it. The Cowboys/Falcons game looks terrific and their helmets are really popping.

The 4520 looks to build upon Denon's success of the 4311. I am very happy with the 5010 (Onkyo) but would love to do a comparison. I am planning to Review the new Marantz 8000 Series pre amp. Should have much of the same anyway and I have never had a Marantz product here so I figured why not. smile.gif

Search or copy and paste-> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com <-to check out my latest Reviews.

Check out these new Lighted Cup Holders:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1402680301175
joerod is offline  
post #3431 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 08:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post

Thanks. I have had a lot of fun playing with it. The Cowboys/Falcons game looks terrific and their helmets are really popping.
The 4520 looks to build upon Denon's success of the 4311. I am very happy with the 5010 (Onkyo) but would love to do a comparison. I am planning to Review the new Marantz 8000 Series pre amp. Should have much of the same anyway and I have never had a Marantz product here so I figured why not. smile.gif

I noticed that even remarkably via your screen shots, the helmets stood out a lot visually. Seems the 103's are good to go, so I found a source on the 'bay for one with the multiregion ready to go.

Went home at lunchtime and in doing some quick research, realised the 4K stability issues were simply back to the fact I'd recently swapped out, quite foolishly, my Audioquest cable from the HTPC output end. soon as I reconnected it with the AQ Carbon, I was able to switch straight into rock solid 3840 X 2160 - all my AQ is conveniently 4K compliant. All issues with 4K signal stability done and dusted, phew. Tonight I'll do some more comprehensive 4K full A/V testing. Impressions so far of the Denon is that if you want an A/V receiver with very quick HDMI switching (low delay) and clean pass through, it's up to the job. A much better experience when switching sources than the 80.3, very little delay and signal locking time comparatively. Sonically as a pure processor into existing amps, it's hard to pick apart from Integra/Onyko. It's Audessey XT32 sounds identical, as I guess as it should.

Checked my own bulb timer. I'm up to 1038. Me thinks time to order spare. I'd be one cranky hombre if I was caught out in the middle of watching something.

OzHDHT is offline  
post #3432 of 10094 Old 11-04-2012, 09:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Joe, I was just researching bulb/lamp housing replacements. I see it's possible to buy the lamp minus housing. Which way did you do it with yours and has she fired back up yet since your last post about it? I am bit concerned about the fiddliness of trying to dissemble the housing and re use it with a new bulb, especially on a unit of the VW1000's ilk. I've never attempted that method. I am approaching my contact at Sony to see what the best price for a full lamp housing assembly would be, given their $699 rrp.

OzHDHT is offline  
post #3433 of 10094 Old 11-05-2012, 01:27 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 21,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzHDHT View Post

I noticed that even remarkably via your screen shots, the helmets stood out a lot visually. Seems the 103's are good to go, so I found a source on the 'bay for one with the multiregion ready to go.
Went home at lunchtime and in doing some quick research, realised the 4K stability issues were simply back to the fact I'd recently swapped out, quite foolishly, my Audioquest cable from the HTPC output end. soon as I reconnected it with the AQ Carbon, I was able to switch straight into rock solid 3840 X 2160 - all my AQ is conveniently 4K compliant. All issues with 4K signal stability done and dusted, phew. Tonight I'll do some more comprehensive 4K full A/V testing. Impressions so far of the Denon is that if you want an A/V receiver with very quick HDMI switching (low delay) and clean pass through, it's up to the job. A much better experience when switching sources than the 80.3, very little delay and signal locking time comparatively. Sonically as a pure processor into existing amps, it's hard to pick apart from Integra/Onyko. It's Audessey XT32 sounds identical, as I guess as it should.
Checked my own bulb timer. I'm up to 1038. Me thinks time to order spare. I'd be one cranky hombre if I was caught out in the middle of watching something.

I would love to send in up converted 4K (as long as it looked better than the 1000 doing it) but the Darblet won't pass it. I wonder if you could get away with using the Darblet before your htpc? Then do the conversion after? Hmmm smile.gif

Search or copy and paste-> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com <-to check out my latest Reviews.

Check out these new Lighted Cup Holders:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1402680301175
joerod is offline  
post #3434 of 10094 Old 11-05-2012, 01:29 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 21,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzHDHT View Post

Joe, I was just researching bulb/lamp housing replacements. I see it's possible to buy the lamp minus housing. Which way did you do it with yours and has she fired back up yet since your last post about it? I am bit concerned about the fiddliness of trying to dissemble the housing and re use it with a new bulb, especially on a unit of the VW1000's ilk. I've never attempted that method. I am approaching my contact at Sony to see what the best price for a full lamp housing assembly would be, given their $699 rrp.

Some of us here have done just the bulb replacement with our VW200s. Someone even made a step by step complete with pics. Not sure how much a bulb is by itself so depending on that cost versus getting the housing... eek.gif

Search or copy and paste-> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com <-to check out my latest Reviews.

Check out these new Lighted Cup Holders:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1402680301175
joerod is offline  
post #3435 of 10094 Old 11-05-2012, 02:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
BOBCAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
There is an ebay seller that has just the lamp bulb, item number 170819385263.
They are out of Hong Kong, but they offer free shipping.
In the question and answer part of the auction, a buyer ask about the brand of lamp. The seller said that it is a generic bulb, but for $7 more, they will provide an original Philips lamp that Sony uses.
If you buy one of these, be sure that you handle it with cotton gloves as if you put one finger print on the lamp, it will fail in a very short time.
BOBCAT is offline  
post #3436 of 10094 Old 11-05-2012, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Central IL
Posts: 4,546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by zellmo View Post

To all you guys waiting for the vw1000 to be supported by 3dtv play... work is in progress ;-) cool.gif

Not sure how long it has been supported, but:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/3dtv-play-system-requirements.html

As of version 310.33 (beta), VPL-VW1000ES is supported! The way that website reads, it might have been supported previously. I haven't checked in at least a couple of months, and I guess nobody here has posted about it lately.

Has anybody tried it? I don't have the 3DTV Play software yet.

Matt
turls is offline  
post #3437 of 10094 Old 11-05-2012, 01:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Central IL
Posts: 4,546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOBCAT View Post

Hi,
Just an FYI,
Best Buy out here had a closeout on Playstation PS3 3D glasses, at about 1/3 of regular price.
They seem to work just fine. Can't tell any difference between them and the Sony glasses that come with the 1000.
So check with your local BB if you need another pair.

Looks like these are $30 multiple places. I almost pulled the trigger yesterday but I just find it hard to be true. Has anybody else tried this? I would think you would at least need the film mentioned earlier in the thread to go over the lenses, and it is a rip-off and only available from Sony.

Matt
turls is offline  
post #3438 of 10094 Old 11-07-2012, 08:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
doublewing11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Timber Country!
Posts: 3,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Ok......my phone bill is becoming like our National debt..........it continues to GROW!!!

So.....need to find screen size for this projector and I'm thinking 140" wide 2.40 screen using S-SE 4k material and would like to incorporate masking panels either side or top/bottom. Have even thought about going constant area, but then I might be getting in over my head with the unusual native ratio.

Intend to talk to Chris at S-SE and Mike here at AVS and figure this screen conundrum out...........................

Anyone have ideas for masking as I hate viewing black bars...............I want the picture to float. Still thinking I might go TAM2 route if all else fails.
doublewing11 is offline  
post #3439 of 10094 Old 11-07-2012, 09:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
mookie b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 796
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublewing11 View Post

Ok......my phone bill is becoming like our National debt..........is continues to GROW!!!
So.....need to find screen size for this projector and I'm thinking 140" wide 2.40 screen using S-SE 4k material and would like to incorporate masking panels either side or top/bottom. Have even thought about going constant area, but then I might be getting in over my head with the unusual native ratio.
Intend to talk to Chris at S-SE and Mike here at AVS and figure this screen conundrum out...........................
Anyone have ideas for masking as I hate viewing black bars...............I want the picture to float. Still thinking I might go TAM2 route is all else fails.

I have a 2.35:1 screen and use manual side masks. Works out well, side masks are on most of the time and it definitely floats. I love the dramatic expanding when a widescreenovie plays though!

mookie b is offline  
post #3440 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 12:09 PM
Senior Member
 
Ben Withrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NC
Posts: 311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublewing11 View Post

Ok......my phone bill is becoming like our National debt..........it continues to GROW!!!
So.....need to find screen size for this projector and I'm thinking 140" wide 2.40 screen using S-SE 4k material and would like to incorporate masking panels either side or top/bottom. Have even thought about going constant area, but then I might be getting in over my head with the unusual native ratio.
Intend to talk to Chris at S-SE and Mike here at AVS and figure this screen conundrum out...........................
Anyone have ideas for masking as I hate viewing black bars...............I want the picture to float. Still thinking I might go TAM2 route if all else fails.

I have a 141" wide 1.89:1 ST130 - microperf. It matches the 4K resolution of the projector, so it is a nice split between 2.35 and 1.78. I wrestled with the screen decision for months. It was the decision I struggled and struggled with the most. Mike Garrett can attest to this. I bought the screen from and bugged him. I believe going with a scoped screen with this projector is a huge mistake. The 16X9 and 1:85 images on a 2.35:1 screen is just way way too small. Just think about how the IMAX scenes in the Dark Knight movies, the 1.85:1 Avengers; 1:85 Avatar, many 3D movies, many animated movies, IMAX documentaries, all TV (think super bowl), etc will look on the such a short screen. Piddly. The 2.35 screen would be only 60" tall, versus 74.4" tall. Plus, 1.78 content would only be 106.8" wide insteasd of 141". 1.85 content would only be 111" wide. These differences are huge. Basically, you get close to 60% more image area for all non-scoped movies, and you lose NOTHING for scoped movies. Do want a piddly sized picture on a $20K - 4K projector?? Do yourself a favor, at least shine the projector on a light colored, prefereably white wall and try it out. Audio Advice has a scoped 141 or so inch wide screen with the sony in Raleigh, and it looks so short in comparision to the 1.89 version. The big issue is how small non-scoped movies will look. You'll be surprised. Also, the black level is so good and the picure is big, that I really don't mind the bars. I thought that I would, but I don't. Imax doesn't use masking - I don't here any one complaining. Regardless of the masking, which is understandably very subjective, go big, don't lose resolution, wow your friends. This will be the future of screen picks. You can thank me later.

Ben
Ben Withrow is offline  
post #3441 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 12:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Ben Withrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NC
Posts: 311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mookie b View Post

I have a 2.35:1 screen and use manual side masks. Works out well, side masks are on most of the time and it definitely floats. I love the dramatic expanding when a widescreenovie plays though!

Mookie, if you had the theater to do all over, wouldn't you rather have the biggest images for each format. The masking is cool to watch, but when you pop in a 1.85:1 movie, wouldn't you want it appear almost 60% bigger with no degredation in resolution? I'm coming to the belief that with true 4K (high res plus a 1.896:1 AR), anamorphic lenses will be unnecesary and undesirable for the vast, vast majority of home theaters and that the only reasons to have a 2.35:1 screen is if you plan on using an anamorphic lens or don't have the height for the width of screen you want.

Ben
Ben Withrow is offline  
post #3442 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 02:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
samalmoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Get an electric screen for 16:9 and roll it up for scope. Paint the wall behind the screen black so you don,t see the bars. Use the projector auto move to position the image..easy...yes..bigger is way better
samalmoe is offline  
post #3443 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 03:29 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 24

My solution to screen size is similar to Ben Withrow's.    I wanted a wider screen for 2.35 than the largest 16:9 screen that would fit my wall.    So I also went with a 'hybrid' size, 2.0 in my case (144x72) since this is the widest that would fit my wall and the highest that I could digest for 16x9 (actually 17x9 for the 1000).   

 

So for 2.35 I zoom to 144"W; the height of the pic is ~ 61", so I shift this down to the bottom edge of the screen and have a ~ 10" wide black bar at the top (where it's essentially ignorable).    For 17x9, I use the full height, 72", and the width of the pic is 136"; this is lens shifted to have a 8" wide black bar at the side, and I slip in a manual panel to mask it.     These two zooming and lens shifting configurations are stored and achieved with the push of one button.

 

This works great for me.   I think everybody has to think though all these issues for their own specific situation, and thus come to different setups that work best for them.

millerwill is online now  
post #3444 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 03:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
mookie b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 796
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow View Post

Mookie, if you had the theater to do all over, wouldn't you rather have the biggest images for each format. The masking is cool to watch, but when you pop in a 1.85:1 movie, wouldn't you want it appear almost 60% bigger with no degredation in resolution? I'm coming to the belief that with true 4K (high res plus a 1.896:1 AR), anamorphic lenses will be unnecesary and undesirable for the vast, vast majority of home theaters and that the only reasons to have a 2.35:1 screen is if you plan on using an anamorphic lens or don't have the height for the width of screen you want.

I think so. You'd need 4 way masking though and that's expensive....of course at the time I got my screen I had no idea I'd be crazy enough to spend as much as I did on the 1000, so maybe I'd do it differently if I had a blank canvas and no limitations from the room.

My room is height challenged though...I maximized the width. When watching 2.35:1 its 112", and I think its around 90" when watching 1.85:1....I'm using the 2.35:1 zoom so i get a little more width for my normal tv watching.

After looking at my own pic....I guess I could tear all that out and get a giant 2.0ish perforated screen and put the speakers and subs behind it....I need to mess with my zoom and see if its too big, first row is only 8.5 feet back and that why I went with this setup where my screen was back another 18 inches or so since my first row was so close...


mookie b is offline  
post #3445 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 05:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing or kayaking )
Posts: 4,710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Quote:
I think so. You'd need 4 way masking though and that's expensive....of course at the time I got my screen I had no idea I'd be crazy enough to spend as much as I did on the 1000, so maybe I'd do it differently if I had a blank canvas and no limitations from the room.

Ya, the expense of a 4 way masking system is exactly why I bought 2 electric screens ( I can't use a fixed screen in my theater, otherwise I'd use 1 fixed and 1 electric ). That way you can have a wider 2.35:1 screen, and a still good sized narrower 16:9 screen. In fact, when I looked into buying an electric screen with masking, 2 screens was almost 1/2 the price.

You can have the best of both worlds !! smile.gif

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Direct Line - 585-671-2972
I'm available 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday Email me at craig@avscience.com
http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, Klipsch, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
post #3446 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 05:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

My solution to screen size is similar to Ben Withrow's.    I wanted a wider screen for 2.35 than the largest 16:9 screen that would fit my wall.    So I also went with a 'hybrid' size, 2.0 in my case (144x72) since this is the widest that would fit my wall and the highest that I could digest for 16x9 (actually 17x9 for the 1000).   

So for 2.35 I zoom to 144"W; the height of the pic is ~ 61", so I shift this down to the bottom edge of the screen and have a ~ 10" wide black bar at the top (where it's essentially ignorable).    For 17x9, I use the full height, 72", and the width of the pic is 136"; this is lens shifted to have a 8" wide black bar at the side, and I slip in a manual panel to mask it.     These two zooming and lens shifting configurations are stored and achieved with the push of one button.

This works great for me.   I think everybody has to think though all these issues for their own specific situation, and thus come to different setups that work best for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post


Ya, the expense of a 4 way masking system is exactly why I bought 2 electric screens ( I can't use a fixed screen in my theater, otherwise I'd use 1 fixed and 1 electric ). That way you can have a wider 2.35:1 screen, and a still good sized narrower 16:9 screen. In fact, when I looked into buying an electric screen with masking, 2 screens was almost 1/2 the price.
You can have the best of both worlds !! smile.gif

I'm putting together a new media room set up In the past we have always had a 16x9 110"diagonal screen and just lived with the black bars. In this family room I need an electric drop screen. I've been leaning toward going with a 2.0 screen and using a Lumagen Mini 3d to auto adapt everything to 2.0 using non linear stretch. You lose a small amount of picture at the edges, but you get a "big screen experience" with both formats. Stewart is making a 2.0 Screen and is marketing it as the "future". Opoma has a built in processor in their projectors to convert everything to 2.0. They call it "SuperWide".

The other option, is what Craig is doing (above). I already have the 16x9 electric drop. Just get the 2.35:1 electric drop and mount them next to each other...You need a projector with good powered lens controls to do it. The current crop of $4-5k PJs don't have it (except the Panasonic). I can't afford to play in the deep water ($20k) like you guys.frown.gif

I would be interested in hearing from others using 2.0 screens (or in between ARs) or is there anyone else using two electric drop screens? Any "issues" with either solution?
Thanks
humbland is offline  
post #3447 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 05:51 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 293
Ten years ago I purchased a 4 way masking Stewart fixed wall screen. Just recently I switched fabrics from Stydeotec 130 to snowmatt 100'

At this point I never use my side masking whose sole purpase was to mask the 1.78 screen down to 1.33. Nothing I watcg is in 1.33 anymore, it was for sports in those days, college etc, which was often 1.33. Today I just use the independent top and bottom masking to mask out the black bars when showing any aspect about 1.78.I simply do not have the width to go beyond 8 ft wide. So any other option is really not available to me.

My point, the method etc you chose is very dependent on your set up limitations and most of us have some. Budget also enters into the equation when it comes to electric masking and the use of anamorphics. In ann ideal world, I would use a 2.4o screen that when masked down would give me a 110 inch 1.78, the size I have now (54 x 96). I would then use the zoom features on my Sony 1000ES to zoom out to a 2.4 width. Of course with no budget constraints I would use variable side masking to perfectly mask whatever the damn aspect was. But i am very very happy with what I have now.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #3448 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 05:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 24

Yes, one can spend $4K or more on 4-way masking systems (provided you have the space to accommodate them), but with some ingenuity one can do quite well with much less.    I qualify my comments though:  my room is not a specially designed and built HT, with rows of seating, etc.   It is a former master BR in  ~90 yr old Berkeley house, but it is (now) fully light controlled, with black covering on most all walls.    I.e., it is close to the 'bat cave', but not with haute decor.

 

See my post a couple items above.     With 2.35, by shifting the pic to line up with the bottom of the screen (which is very desirable in general), the black bar is across the top.    The eye NEVER picks this up, so one can forget about masking it.    For 17x9 pics (which fills the full 72" height) I lens shift to line up the pic with the right side of the screen (since my main seat is slightly to the right of center), and there is an 8" wide black bar on the left side.     For this I bought a 1.5" thick styrofoam sheet at Home Depot (~$7 IIRC), cut a section 72''x8", and covered it with ProtoStar self adhesive material; it's the same black felt material on my screen frame.    It slips perfectly inside the screen frame (Dalite DaSnap, which protrudes 1.5" in front of the screen )and gives a result that looks exactly like my screen without a black bar.   Total cost < $50.

 

Again, one has to plan all of this--size, screen frame, screen material etc.--but by doing so one can often come up with a very satisfactory solution without being extravagant.

millerwill is online now  
post #3449 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 06:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 293
I would qualify that. Most males can. Most females can't.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #3450 of 10094 Old 11-08-2012, 06:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing or kayaking )
Posts: 4,710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Humbland, I find that all you need is power zoom. The screens are so close together that focus never needs to be adjusted.

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Direct Line - 585-671-2972
I'm available 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday Email me at craig@avscience.com
http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, Klipsch, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Sony Vpl Vw1000es Projector , Casio Rs 232 Adapter Catalog Category Projectors Accessories
Gear in this thread

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