Is 155" 16:9 screen with 3D doable with reasonable brightness? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 02-18-2013, 04:41 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Tnedator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 28
In a few months I'll start construction on a new home and will have a dedicated home theater room. I've been plugging away for the last few years with an Infocus IN76 on a 118" screen as my main TV.

We've done some testing with our living room setup and feel that for a screen dedicated to movies, and selected TV (Spartacus and that sort), that 10' is about the perfect distance for our current 118" screen. Making it very immersive, but not overwhelming/tiring in either 16:9 or when watching a 2:35 or so movie.

My calculations are that in order to keep the same viewing angle as my 118" TV at 10', we need to go to 155" at 13' to keep the ~47* viewing angle (I would really prefer the first/primary row not be closer than 13' in the new room). I also can probably not go larger than 155", because of ceiling height, which will be 10' if I go completely flat across the 18' wide room, or I can get higher if I angle up from the walls or build soffets or something on each side.

So, my question is are there decent choices for a projector, preferably 3D, that will give me a good picture at a that size?

More importantly, since I am probably a year away from needing to purchase/install the projector (need to determine sizes and stuff, but not by electronics), Is there anything on the near term horizon I should be looking for (like announced at CES) and ideally would love to not use shutter glasses.

Anyway, I've been reading threads and googling, checking the screen size calculator on projector central, but since I've been trying hard to hold off on buying a new projector in my current home, I haven't been keeping up with the current crop of projectors.
Tnedator is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 02-18-2013, 05:09 PM
Senior Member
 
plasmaowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I can't speak of all screen material but a HP screen should give you plenty of light. I have a 159"16:9 HP screen and it's nicely bright in 3D using my Sony HW50. I sit about 16 feet from the screen and it's HUGE. I think 13' from a 155" screen may be too close.
plasmaowner is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 02-18-2013, 05:12 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 349
If you have the budget, there are projectors that can do this. You can also do this with lesser projectors as long as the screen has enough gain. Many people use a Da-Lite HP to get large bright 3D. Does require the projector lens to be placed near seated head height. If we can help you, just give us a call.



Added:
When you get interrupted and it takes you 5 minutes to complete a post, you get beat out. smile.gif

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 offline  
post #4 of 17 Old 02-18-2013, 05:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmaowner View Post

I can't speak of all screen material but a HP screen should give you plenty of light. I have a 159"16:9 HP screen and it's nicely bright in 3D using my Sony HW50. I sit about 16 feet from the screen and it's HUGE. I think 13' from a 155" screen may be too close.


I sit about 14 feet from my 142" 16:9 HP. I thought my screen was big, the 159" is a monster.

3D + HP are designed for one another. The typical 1000 lumen 3D projector looks great on my HP, but it's the older 2.8 material. Some have measured it as high as 3.0 gain when the projector is at dead center.

That size at low gain would be way to dim for my preferences. I like to squint once in a while in a bright scene. then it's bright enough. cool.gif
zombie10k is online now  
post #5 of 17 Old 02-18-2013, 07:38 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Tnedator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

If you have the budget, there are projectors that can do this. You can also do this with lesser projectors as long as the screen has enough gain. Many people use a Da-Lite HP to get large bright 3D. Does require the projector lens to be placed near seated head height. If we can help you, just give us a call.



Added:
When you get interrupted and it takes you 5 minutes to complete a post, you get beat out. smile.gif

I'll give you guys a shout and talk some things through. Way back when, I got my IN-76 from AVS.

I definitely would like to avoid the projector at head height. The plan is to ceiling mount it, which would put it just barely on to the screen (the lens level that is).

At least on the initial go around, I don't want to break the bank on the projector and probably the same on the sound, because I think the sound isolation is going to cost a pretty penny (less concerned with rest of house, but am concerned about neighbors dealing with bass). I can always upgrade projector/sound later, but I want to get the construction right from the beginning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmaowner View Post

I can't speak of all screen material but a HP screen should give you plenty of light. I have a 159"16:9 HP screen and it's nicely bright in 3D using my Sony HW50. I sit about 16 feet from the screen and it's HUGE. I think 13' from a 155" screen may be too close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I sit about 14 feet from my 142" 16:9 HP. I thought my screen was big, the 159" is a monster.

3D + HP are designed for one another. The typical 1000 lumen 3D projector looks great on my HP, but it's the older 2.8 material. Some have measured it as high as 3.0 gain when the projector is at dead center.

That size at low gain would be way to dim for my preferences. I like to squint once in a while in a bright scene. then it's bright enough. cool.gif

Maybe my thinking is wrong, but in the case of your two screens, when I look at viewing angle calculators, they are basically the same. 159" at 16 feet & 142" @ 14 feet have basically the same viewing angle, ~40*. So, shouldn't those two viewing experiences be pretty much equal even though one screen is quite a bit bigger than the other? I was just showing this to my wife by having her move up to 10' and then 9' when watching our 118" screen.

We are used to watching a 118" screen at 13' and have done so for the last 7 years (didn't realize how long it had been until I looked it up, but makes sense we are on our sixth bulb I think). Even with my wife, who isn't an AV enthusiast, I said something like, "we will probably have a bigger screen in the home theater" and she said, "I sure hope so."

Currently, we have a viewing angle a little less than you guys, we are at about ~36.5, but both feel we need to be bigger in the theater to have a more immersive experience. Are we kidding ourselves and going to get sick of the bigger screen, if we jump all the way to 47^?

Since I have some time, I think I need to slide my seating forward, and spend a few days at 40^, same angle as you guys, then maybe 43^ and then 46^ (12', 11' and 10'). I have a 170" at work, so I may bring her in on a weekend and watch a movie on that at around 14-15', which will be the same viewing angle as my 118" at 10', just to make sure that maintaining viewing angle by varying distances on two vastly different size screens gives the same feeling in terms of immersion and getting/tired overwhelmed.
Tnedator is online now  
post #6 of 17 Old 02-19-2013, 12:23 PM
Member
 
RenStimpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
As another point of view, I'm in the same situation where I'm building a new theater and I plan to go much bigger than before. Previously my viewing angle was around 37-40 degrees when I sat 11-12 feet from a 96" wide screen (110" diagonal). I enjoyed it, but when I went to the theater I always felt like the screen took up a much wider field of view then at home. That is based on my seating preference, which was a little closer than half way to the screen. It just never felt like my home theater was as immersive as going to the theater.

For my next room, I plan on installing a 12' wide screen (165" diagonal) and my primary seating position will be around 12'. That works out to a viewing angle of around 53 degrees. Just to make sure I'm not crazy, I have setup a projector on a wall at home to project a 12' wide screen and have sat as close as 11' when watching clips and video games. So far the screen does not in any way seem too big. In fact the viewing angle is much smaller than watching films at an Imax theater, so technically I think I could go bigger. For that reason I'm debating with installing a custom aspect ratio screen so that I can expand the width to 14' for 2.35:1 movies while keeping the width for 16x9 movies at 12'. The height of my room won't let me go any taller for 16x9 content or else I would go bigger there as well.

Of course something that big isn't for anyone, so YMMV. But I thought I would mention my plans so you don't feel too alone in wanting to go big.
RenStimpy is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 02-21-2013, 06:09 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Tnedator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Ok, an alternative I'm considering is going CIH with zoom. It seems, from what I've read so far that the JVC's (probably RS56 or next years version of it) is among the best options for using memory to zoom for CIH.

If I go this route, as I still want to upgrade the size of my 16:9 from my current living room 118" TV, I am thinking about 152" 2.35 CIH, which would be ~121" at 1.78. My seating would probably be something like 12' and 17' for the two rows.

How does this sound? Should the JVC at this size be plenty bright?
Tnedator is online now  
post #8 of 17 Old 02-21-2013, 07:31 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 Tnedator View Post

Ok, an alternative I'm considering is going CIH with zoom. It seems, from what I've read so far that the JVC's (probably RS56 or next years version of it) is among the best options for using memory to zoom for CIH.

If I go this route, as I still want to upgrade the size of my 16:9 from my current living room 118" TV, I am thinking about 152" 2.35 CIH, which would be ~121" at 1.78. My seating would probably be something like 12' and 17' for the two rows.

How does this sound? Should the JVC at this size be plenty bright?

I really like to sit close to the screen to try an emulate the theater experience. My first row, which is where I sit, is one screen width from my 141" wide 1.89:1 screen. This works well with 4K, but when I was playing around with my old RS1 before Sony 1000 arrived, I was surprised at how visible the pixel structure became on a 141" wide screen. It wasn't obvious at first, but after a little viewing the screen appeared to have a texture, which wasn't present on my old 110" diagonal from 12' back. Both screens were ST130s. IMHO, 1080P isn't made for sitting much closer than about 1.2X the screen width. Plus, the dimmer the picture, the more noticeable the affect seemed to be. JVC's E-shift will hopefully minimize the effect.

Also, I would steer anyone away from CIH screens, unless they are height limited. If you are using a zoom method, CIH just doesn't make any sense to me. You are giving away so much picture for all 1:85 movies, TV (think superbowl), and many new action movies are 1.85 or have 1:85:1 content due to those shot for IMAX. Think IMAX documentaries, most 3D flix, Avatar, Avengers, Dark Knight, Dark Knight Rises, the upcoming Star Trek. A much narrower 1.85 or 1.78 image on a 2.35 screen is simply not satisfying. Why give away the extra real estate when you don't have to?

At the very least, throw the different images on a blank wall and see for yourself.

Ben
Ben Withrow is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 02-21-2013, 08:20 PM
Member
 
DrZaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Joisey
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmaowner View Post

I can't speak of all screen material but a HP screen should give you plenty of light. I have a 159"16:9 HP screen and it's nicely bright in 3D using my Sony HW50. I sit about 16 feet from the screen and it's HUGE. I think 13' from a 155" screen may be too close.

Any hot flashing issues with a screen that size? Can you take some snap shots of the screen with video please smile.gif Thanks
DrZaus is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 02-22-2013, 02:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZaus View Post

Any hot flashing issues with a screen that size? Can you take some snap shots of the screen with video please smile.gif Thanks

I think you mean hot spotting. The HP material doesn't hot spot. The screen material and retroreflective properties of the screen make it so.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #11 of 17 Old 02-22-2013, 06:53 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 7,221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow View Post

I really like to sit close to the screen to try an emulate the theater experience. My first row, which is where I sit, is one screen width from my 141" wide 1.89:1 screen. This works well with 4K, but when I was playing around with my old RS1 before Sony 1000 arrived, I was surprised at how visible the pixel structure became on a 141" wide screen. It wasn't obvious at first, but after a little viewing the screen appeared to have a texture, which wasn't present on my old 110" diagonal from 12' back. Both screens were ST130s. IMHO, 1080P isn't made for sitting much closer than about 1.2X the screen width. Plus, the dimmer the picture, the more noticeable the affect seemed to be. JVC's E-shift will hopefully minimize the effect.

Also, I would steer anyone away from CIH screens, unless they are height limited. If you are using a zoom method, CIH just doesn't make any sense to me. You are giving away so much picture for all 1:85 movies, TV (think superbowl), and many new action movies are 1.85 or have 1:85:1 content due to those shot for IMAX. Think IMAX documentaries, most 3D flix, Avatar, Avengers, Dark Knight, Dark Knight Rises, the upcoming Star Trek. A much narrower 1.85 or 1.78 image on a 2.35 screen is simply not satisfying. Why give away the extra real estate when you don't have to?

At the very least, throw the different images on a blank wall and see for yourself.

Hey Ben, You should post some images of your theater. As for the loss of image size, if going with a scope screen, there may be a solution for that coming. All of us CIH guys are hoping Folded Space gets incorporated. If it does, then we will be able to watch all BD movies in full 1080P scope format. As it stands right now, you have to decide to either give up screen size, live with black bars or pay for a masking system.

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 offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 02-22-2013, 08:04 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 AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Hey Ben, You should post some images of your theater. As for the loss of image size, if going with a scope screen, there may be a solution for that coming. All of us CIH guys are hoping Folded Space gets incorporated. If it does, then we will be able to watch all BD movies in full 1080P scope format. As it stands right now, you have to decide to either give up screen size, live with black bars or pay for a masking system.

Here is a link to my build

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1416719/the-withrow-build-erskine-design-equipment-from-everywhere#post_22152916


I think I'm picky about the image, but the bars just don't bother me on these high contrast projectors in a dark room. IMax doesn't have a masking system, I don't hear anyone complaining, and it is generally the preferred way to watch a movie out (even though the new digital projectors have crappy contrast compared to the old 70MM projectors and the LCOS/SXRD technology).

The big question is do you want your non-2.23:1 images to be over 57% bigger for basically the same money?

Here is the math for a 141" wide x 74.4" 1.896 screen.

The 2.35 image is 141X60, just like a CIH 141" wide screen.

For a 1.85 image on the CIH, the image is only 111 X 60 for a surface area of 46.25 sq ft.
For a 1.85 image on my screen, the image is 141 X 74.38 for a surface area of 72.8 sq ft.

That means for the same screen width my 1.85 images are over 57% bigger - over 14" taller and 30" wider - than on a CIH of the same width. It is a huge difference to me.

I'm not trying to force any issues. I just read all of this CIH stuff over the years here on the forum, was led to believe that this was the way to go, and now believe it would have been a big mistake for me. Dennis Erskine fought me over this. He was insisting on a CIH system, but I didn't relent. Now, I see that he is installing IMAX personal home theaters with floor to ceiling screens. I'll bet big money that the IMAX theaters are not CIH. They didn't look that way from his brochure.

Sometime the Kool-Aide is bad, and I'd hate to see folks not even consider this option.

Ben
Ben Withrow is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 02-23-2013, 06:43 AM
Member
 
kimg1453's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Ben,

How did you come to choose a 1.89:1 ratio screen? I assume this is custom as well.

Kim
kimg1453 is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 02-23-2013, 08:51 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
Kim, it matched the native aspect of the 1000 and was very close to 1.85:1 to almost all movies that aren't 2.35:1. Many folks are trying a 2.0:1 hybrid, which is real close to what I have, and tweaking the zoom to max area for 1:85 and 2:35 content. If you curious, just experiment on a light colored wall. It is very useful to help select screen width, aspect ratio, riser height, and seating distance. I actually did a DIY painted screen during my build as a sanity check.

Ben
Ben Withrow is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 02-24-2013, 07:42 AM
Member
 
kimg1453's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Thanks Ben.

I was finally able to figure out that you obtained that ratio due to the Sony's chip set. I'll have to keep this info in mind when I finally select which projector I eventually purchase since I'm not sure I would continue with an Anamorphic Lens or go to the Zoom method.

Kim
kimg1453 is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 02-25-2013, 09:43 PM
Member
 
DrZaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Joisey
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmaowner View Post

I can't speak of all screen material but a HP screen should give you plenty of light. I have a 159"16:9 HP screen and it's nicely bright in 3D using my Sony HW50. I sit about 16 feet from the screen and it's HUGE. I think 13' from a 155" screen may be too close.

can you post some picts please also can you provide your model number also.. thanks
DrZaus is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 02-25-2013, 09:48 PM
Member
 
DrZaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Joisey
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I sit about 14 feet from my 142" 16:9 HP. I thought my screen was big, the 159" is a monster.

3D + HP are designed for one another. The typical 1000 lumen 3D projector looks great on my HP, but it's the older 2.8 material. Some have measured it as high as 3.0 gain when the projector is at dead center.

That size at low gain would be way to dim for my preferences. I like to squint once in a while in a bright scene. then it's bright enough. cool.gif

I'm sold on the High Power based on Zombie's comment..
DrZaus is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector

User Tag List

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