2.35 Projectors? Need advice on which one to buy! - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 01:23 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi,

So this is my first time considering getting into home theater setup, I have decided although I love watching TV shows , it drives me nuts having the black bars of 2.35 films on my Sony TV. I will be doing most likely no gaming to maybe 5% gaming on this setup. I do have a few questions though. I was looking at something like the Optoma HD20/33. 3D for me is not needed, I do not like 3D films and they give me headaches. My price point would be around $1,000 but hopefully under that and I would pay a few hundred bucks more than that for the right projector. Screen size will be 120" roughly using the 2.35 measurement guide I found on the web and I will have a throw distance of around 15-17 feet.

What does 16:9 content Tv shows/slight gaming look like on a 2.35 setup? I would not want horizontal bars or any weird looking stretching. I understand alot of projectors nowdays have lens shift and memory zoom etc but I have no experience in this and cant find too much in depth information on the internet. I would be interested in these functions as I dont want to spend money on an anamorphic lens or have two different screens.

So as a recap!

No 3d
15-17ft throw range
Around $1,000
Plays 2.35 as full screen with no letter boxing
Plays 16:9 full screen no horizontal letter boxing or weird looking stretch.
How useful are lens shift / memory zoom

Is optoma hd20/33 capable of this?

All of this will be powered from a HTPC I am building, and nearly all content will be 24p.

Any advice would be welcome! sorry if it sems like I havent done enough research but having never dealt with this before and checked youtube and read guides I cant find all the answers im looking for.

Cheers,

Ben.
Ben Agg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 02:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
rekbones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somers, CT
Posts: 558
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 50
All newer projectors display only a 16:9 image (just as your TV). If you have a 2:35 screen the black bars are still there just projected off the screen (unless you use an anamorphic lens to alter the aspect ratio, very expensive). I use an HD33 with a 110" 16:9 screen but use a masking system to change it into a 2.35 screen (masking off the top and bottom of the screen with black velvet panels when viewing 2.35 content). There are many methods to achieve this just go to the CH screen section of this forum to read up on it. Power zoom and lens shift with power masking is one way to go but you will be well above your $1000 range

Smart enough to know better, to old to care
rekbones is offline  
post #3 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 02:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,543
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 163
There are no native 2.35 projectors and as such you'll still be projecting black bars with 2.35 content unless an anamorphic lens is used.

Without a lens you can project the black bars above and below the 2.35 screen so that they are not as visible but you'll want to be sure the wall behind the screen is as dark as possible since the black bars are still projected.

The suggested methods are a projector with lens memory or using the manual zoom method (if an anamorphic lens will not be in use).

Proper set-up for doing so can be tricky with a manual zoom projector and some simply do not function well for this purpose but some projectors do have a 2.35 mode where they will shoot proper 16:9 aspect within the 2.35 (however doing so means you are loosing a good bit of resolution as the 16:9 content will be scaled to fit and you'll still have projected black bars).

The advantage of lens memory projectors is that they can use the full 16:9 resolution of the panel while shooting within the height constraints of a 2.35 screen (so no actual projected black bars while doing 16:9 onto a 2.35 screen).

Then others choose to use dual screens, 1.78 (16:9) and a 2.35.

Jason

My Twitch Game Stream [PS4/Xone/PC]...
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.
DaGamePimp is offline  
post #4 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 04:40 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the replys guys!

Ok, so first of all I dont want to use 2 screens and my wall is way wider than it is tall so 2.35 makes sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGamePimp View Post

The advantage of lens memory projectors is that they can use the full 16:9 resolution of the panel while shooting within the height constraints of a 2.35 screen (so no actual projected black bars while doing 16:9 onto a 2.35 screen).

Jason

So 16:9 will look absolutely fine if the projector has lens memory on the 2.35 screen ? , I am going to use black velvet/felt covering all around the edge of the screen so when the black bars get projected out I cant see them. Do the Optoma's have lens memory? if not would you possibly be able to reccomend a few to me?

2.35 Screen with black felt around the edges
Lens memory projector

with that I should be set for full 2.35 scope films and 16:9 looking perfect inside it too smile.gif ? *edit* One last quick thing, when the projector zooms and puts the 2.35 letterboxing outside of the screen, does the aspect ratio stay the same so the image is not distorted or stretched in a weird way?

These are probably very annoying questions for experienced guys, but I want to try and get it right before spending $1,000-$2,000 and getting it wrong smile.gif

Really appreciate the input.

Cheers,

Ben.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #5 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
You are already getting in wrong IMO because you set a budget which hits the most entry level of home theater projectors, then demand a specification that is NOT in line with what the most basic of home theater projectors are designed to provide.

If you want 2.35, which is conveniently accessible at the cheapest level, then you want the Panasonic AE8000 which has motorized lens capabilities and lens memory which allows you to setup presets for a 2.35 screen. This projector is more than $2,000 and is the cheapest one that I am aware of with this functionality. There are a lot of options which cost a great deal more, and this IS the poor mans way to get an anamorphic setup.

That said, when you go to 16:9 mode, you will be pillarboxed with the image, and there is nothing you can do with that.

So, you either raise your budget, or you change your expectations, OR - you may manually rezoom/focus the projector manually with a projectors like the Epson 8350 which has the zoom range to accomplish what you are trying to do, but every single time you switch from 2.35:1 to 1.78:1, you will be adjusting your projectors zoom and focus - which is about the least friendly thing I can think of doing in a projection setup.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #6 of 30 Old 05-22-2013, 06:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the reply, was a bit of a reality check but then again thats why I had to ask these questions. So the AE8000 would be what im looking for I can check prices on that as I cannot go with a manual option that would drive me crazy! , I will have to re-adjust my budget but for 16:9 would you reccomend using 2 screens? or do you feel the 16:9 letterboxing is easier to deal with that the 2.35 top and bottom letterboxing? what would be entry level pricepoint for an anamorphic lens setup? I am guessing at least $5,000 +?

Thanks for the reply.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #7 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
An anamorphic lens is... Cripes, I don't know. There is a specific forum for that here - http://www.avsforum.com/f/117/2-35-1-constant-image-height-chat

I just haven't checked pricing recently, but Panamorph will likely run about $5,000 with the sled, lens and anything else you may need. So, that is not an inexpensive solution for sure, but it works great.

Generally, I recommend people buy a 1.78:1 screen unless they have an extremely good reason, and the budget to go to 2.35:1. I like 2.35:1 setups when they are done right... But, that is the key concept - doing it right. The zoom method gives you 2.35:1 and you lose brightness when you do this and you lose resolution. You also end up with a 16:9 image which is smaller than you would have gotten if you had just gone with a 16:9 screen to begin with. So, I have a fairly strong opinion that people should go 16:9 unless their wall forces them to 2.35 (low ceiling height), or their budget allows them to go with an anamorphic lens setup. I know with my 8' ceilings my 161" screen is definitely on the 'large' side, but it still fits and allows a center speaker under the screen, but acoustically transparent screens allow for a very large 16:9 screen to go in place with in-wall speakers which can be pretty cool.

I certainly don't want you to feel silly on any of this as it took me years to really think about what was going on with front projection, but it seems like when it comes to 2.35 setups, it is almost all about marketing instead of anything else. It generates more sales and higher dollars to sell 2.35 CIH as a product. So, it's not for those 'on a budget' so much... but it is possible to do with a reasonable budget.

See, if I were going to do 2.35 because my wall really supported it and I really wanted it, and I was on a tight budget...

I would get the AE8000.
I would probably get, or maybe even build, a set of curtains which would mask off the 2.35 screen down to 1.78:1 when I switched between modes. This way, the screen would always appear properly 'framed' as my setup changed. I know Carada (www.carada.com) sells a masking system, but something as simple as black curtains could do this for you and work well.

The big thing, that will make you the happiest, IMO, is the AE8000 projector, especially if you are in a proper theater setup with dark walls, ceiling, and carpet as that projector is one of the best mid-level models out there right now. Great blacks, excellent colors, etc.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #8 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 08:43 AM
Member
 
SiggUA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
There is one projector that can display 2.35, but it is unfortunately not a special offer: The Avielo Optix Superwide 235
http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/avielo-optix-superwide-235-projector
SiggUA is offline  
post #9 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiggUA View Post

There is one projector that can display 2.35, but it is unfortunately not a special offer: The Avielo Optix Superwide 235
http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/avielo-optix-superwide-235-projector
I wasn't going to mention that one. With HDMI 2.0 there is actually a specification that allows for native 2.35 aspect ratio material (off of what?) to be delivered which might be really cool, and hopefully we will see a few more projectors come to market with a native 2.35 aspect ratio for the front projection crowd, but until then, it mostly remains a cash grab for installers and the industry.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #10 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 02:21 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV_Integrated View Post

An anamorphic lens is... Cripes, I don't know. There is a specific forum for that here - http://www.avsforum.com/f/117/2-35-1-constant-image-height-chat

I just haven't checked pricing recently, but Panamorph will likely run about $5,000 with the sled, lens and anything else you may need. So, that is not an inexpensive solution for sure, but it works great.

Generally, I recommend people buy a 1.78:1 screen unless they have an extremely good reason, and the budget to go to 2.35:1. I like 2.35:1 setups when they are done right... But, that is the key concept - doing it right. The zoom method gives you 2.35:1 and you lose brightness when you do this and you lose resolution. You also end up with a 16:9 image which is smaller than you would have gotten if you had just gone with a 16:9 screen to begin with. So, I have a fairly strong opinion that people should go 16:9 unless their wall forces them to 2.35 (low ceiling height), or their budget allows them to go with an anamorphic lens setup. I know with my 8' ceilings my 161" screen is definitely on the 'large' side, but it still fits and allows a center speaker under the screen, but acoustically transparent screens allow for a very large 16:9 screen to go in place with in-wall speakers which can be pretty cool.

I certainly don't want you to feel silly on any of this as it took me years to really think about what was going on with front projection, but it seems like when it comes to 2.35 setups, it is almost all about marketing instead of anything else. It generates more sales and higher dollars to sell 2.35 CIH as a product. So, it's not for those 'on a budget' so much... but it is possible to do with a reasonable budget.

See, if I were going to do 2.35 because my wall really supported it and I really wanted it, and I was on a tight budget...

I would get the AE8000.
I would probably get, or maybe even build, a set of curtains which would mask off the 2.35 screen down to 1.78:1 when I switched between modes. This way, the screen would always appear properly 'framed' as my setup changed. I know Carada (www.carada.com) sells a masking system, but something as simple as black curtains could do this for you and work well.

The big thing, that will make you the happiest, IMO, is the AE8000 projector, especially if you are in a proper theater setup with dark walls, ceiling, and carpet as that projector is one of the best mid-level models out there right now. Great blacks, excellent colors, etc.

Hey, thanks for taking the time again.

I did more research before you posted and my ceiling height is most definitley on the low side, so I think I am forced to go with 2.35 anyway, I am aware I will lose resolution as the letterboxing is projected outside of the white screen and the letterboxing takes up pixels still. 16:9 content for me isn't so much about excellent image quality as I watch alot of 720p content in TV shows the big one for me is always films, I am aware that may sound counter intuitive saying that I want 2.35 for high quality movie experience and then using the zoom method which will deteriorate the quality a bit, but price vs reward I think this is an excellent compromise and then just adding curtains as you said when watching 16:9 content.

The Panasonic AE4000 I read also has the zoom feature, my room is very very dark has very little ambient light, would you ever reccomend buying a second hand one of these and buying a new bulb or do you think getting a new projector is the only way? I think I can find a few knocking around on ebay for $1,200 - $2000. Is there anything wrong with the AE4000 for what I am trying to achieve?

Again, thanks for taking the time.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #11 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 03:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,543
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 163
Ben,

The AE4000 does everything that you are wanting to do as well as likely being the most cost effective 'current' option to do so properly.

The AE7000/AE8000 are brighter and offer 3D but they are very similar in performance to the AE4000 regarding 2D, they are superior on paper but it is not a drastic real world difference.

Not to advertise my own unit redface.gif but I just happen to have an AE4000 for sale here at AVS since you may be looking for one from a reputable seller (see below). wink.gif

Jason
AV_Integrated likes this.

My Twitch Game Stream [PS4/Xone/PC]...
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.
DaGamePimp is offline  
post #12 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 03:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Agg View Post

The Panasonic AE4000 I read also has the zoom feature, my room is very very dark has very little ambient light, would you ever reccomend buying a second hand one of these and buying a new bulb or do you think getting a new projector is the only way? I think I can find a few knocking around on ebay for $1,200 - $2000. Is there anything wrong with the AE4000 for what I am trying to achieve?
The issue with buying used is that it is used. As the member above said, it works, and I believe the AE4000 was the first to offer the motorized zoom/anamorphic feature which is really cool and gets you from here to there at a livable price.

I would likely jump on the offer above with some discussion with the forum member.

I must say that I am not a fan of used projectors because they are all out of warranty, you don't know the condition of the lamps, and you don't know the condition of the LCD panels or the projector itself. This makes eBay a tough place to buy and most people don't post photos of it actually in operation.

I would hope a forum member would be more on the up and up and be willing to let you return it within 30 days if there is a significant issue which comes up, but that's a discussion you need to have with them. I've personally sold a few projectors on eBay, they worked, they sold for not a lot of money, and they people that bought them were happy with them.

It hits your budget and the AE4000 will outperform anything else around that price, so why not?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #13 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 05:27 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV_Integrated View Post

The issue with buying used is that it is used. As the member above said, it works, and I believe the AE4000 was the first to offer the motorized zoom/anamorphic feature which is really cool and gets you from here to there at a livable price.

I would likely jump on the offer above with some discussion with the forum member.

I must say that I am not a fan of used projectors because they are all out of warranty, you don't know the condition of the lamps, and you don't know the condition of the LCD panels or the projector itself. This makes eBay a tough place to buy and most people don't post photos of it actually in operation.

I would hope a forum member would be more on the up and up and be willing to let you return it within 30 days if there is a significant issue which comes up, but that's a discussion you need to have with them. I've personally sold a few projectors on eBay, they worked, they sold for not a lot of money, and they people that bought them were happy with them.

It hits your budget and the AE4000 will outperform anything else around that price, so why not?

Yeh I think its the best option, I will just make sure I buy from a reputable seller , will start grabbing the peices together in the next month or so. Thanks for your help cant explain how much use it has been to me.

Ben.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #14 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 06:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,862
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 179
I just want to be make certain you understand that when you project a 16x9 image on a 2.35:1 screen there will be black vertical bars along each side of the screen unless you add some form of mechnical black masking to your screen to essentially only expose a 16x9 "framed" area within your 2.35:1 screen. There is no free ride here as a complete 16x9 image cannot fully fill out a 2.35:1 screen and a complete 2.35:1 image cannot fully fill out a 16x9 screen. It all comes down to either having vertical bars (i.e., piillar boxed image ) to the sides of the projected image or horizontal bars (i.e., letter boxed image) along the top and bottom of the projector image. The only way to have the black bars visible for both image formats is either to use two screens or use a mechanical masking system on the screen.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is online now  
post #15 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 08:40 PM
Member
 
DragonSixGolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I have basically this setup now. a 50" x 120" Blackout cloth/poplar 1x4 screen. For masking i just used 4 of these curtains 2 stretched wide behind the middle screen (16:9) and the other in front, hanging from rods like these for 2.35 open them all the way, and for 1.78 just pull them closed. I was going to sew magnets and washers to keep them in place, but the rough fabric sticks to the screen, so it only takes a second to press it into place. i know it sounds cheap, but it's all navy/matte back and from the seats, it looks pretty clean. The screen has no border, it just "floats" between the curtains. If you want a sharper edge, a large sheet of foamcore wrapped in velvet makes an easy slideable mask.

I was using a viewsonic pro8100 LCD that had both 1.6 zoom and motorized zoom/lens shift/focus. Really nice features that you wont find again for $1100. It worked well for poor mans CIH and 50"/800 vertical pixels still left good image quality. The projector was at the bare minimum for brightness when the bulb had 1000hrs.

So you could manage a DIY setup like that for less than 150 as long as you can find a projector with 1.5x zoom and vertical lens shift...and preferably 2000+ lumens. It actually works well, zooming smaller for 16:9 improves contrast and detail, and zooming out for 2.35 brightens the image and you get that impressive cinemascope look.

Anyway, a heavy HDMI cable fried my receiver, which then zapped the HDMI inputs on the Pro8100 so now i'm using an acer h6510bd 16:9. I'm using digital zoom to get rid of the letterboxing....and i hate it. Wish I'd got another 1.5x/lens shift projector so now i'm designing a sliding mount rail system that moves the projector up 10" and back 16" so i can have 2.35 again.

Of course there are expensive anamorphic lenses, motorized masking systems, lens memory (which usually still needs tweaked) but if you'd rather just spend 5 minutes making adjustments you can spend the $3K on something else.
DragonSixGolf is offline  
post #16 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 09:40 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yeh I am aware that I will have to mask off for when I am watching 16:9 content but thats not a problem, I think the Panny AE4000 sounds like the projector for me so in the next month or two I will try and pick one up from someone reputable.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #17 of 30 Old 05-23-2013, 10:56 PM
Member
 
DragonSixGolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Here's a pointless GIF I spent way too long making.

DragonSixGolf is offline  
post #18 of 30 Old 05-26-2013, 06:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
avsform1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Ben,

You can always get an older Lumagen Radiance XD video processor and scale it the source to 2.35. Add option the Radiance is that you can get a super 125 point Calibration. The Radiance calibrated will make your PJ picture quality that of a higher priced PJ. I picked up 2 of these on ebay for under $600. The Radiance scale vs an Anamorphic lens is a trade off... with the anamorphic lens pixel structure isn't cut off. With the Radiance you can save money with a less expensive PJ and not pay for a lens.

Good luck.

If your are in the market for a 2.35 screen check the classifieds... There are some deals in there including one I am selling.
avsform1 is offline  
post #19 of 30 Old 05-26-2013, 09:59 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey,

Thats actually a really great Idea. I can set lumagen to auto scale for me? so it knows 2.35 content and 1.78 and will output to the projector automatically so I will not need to change any projector settings? with this method I could get an Optoma HD20/33 , i have read great reviews about these and if im being honest I would much prefer a new projector just for the warranty. How would you rate the pixel loss is in these situations when playing 2.35 content

AE4000 using zoom for 2.35
Lumagen Radiance + optoma hd20/33 for 2.35
Anamorphic lens (none obv)

as I said before I think the only possible downside to that method you mentioned would be if it doesnt adjust content automatically between 2.35 and 1.78 ? what other drawbacks are their to using this method? is all processing by the unit done on the fly or do you have any type of buffering times etc?

Cheers,

Ben.
Ben Agg is offline  
post #20 of 30 Old 05-28-2013, 10:18 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Or does anybody else have experience with a lumagen radiance XD they could chime in with please smile.gif ?
Ben Agg is offline  
post #21 of 30 Old 05-28-2013, 01:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jnabq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Albq. NM, USA
Posts: 1,128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Agg View Post

Or does anybody else have experience with a lumagen radiance XD they could chime in with please smile.gif ?

http://www.avsforum.com/f/37/video-processors
jnabq is offline  
post #22 of 30 Old 05-28-2013, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
I wouldn't go with the Lumagen... My sources are already HD - They come into the projector at 1080i or 1080p most often so unless a scaler is going to show some sort of significant improvement over my existing 1080i/p sources, I don't get what it is there for.

Also, since I do want some occasional 3D usage, I'm not sure how a product like this will deal with those sources.

My bigger concern is the resolution I would be throwing away going from 2.35 to 1.78 without rezooming the projector. I would NEVER be using the full 1920x1080 pixels available to utilize. Instead, it would be 1920x817 for 2.35 material and it would only be 1454x817 for 16:9 material. That is almost half of the resolution you won't be using - and correspondingly about half the brightness of the projector which would be lost off screen. The Lumagen may provide superior video processing to take a 2.35 native image and scaling it up to 1920x1080 for use with an anamorphic lens, but I wouldn't recommend it for use with a native 2.35 screen without the anamorphic lens in place.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #23 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 02:38 AM
Member
 
SomeCreepinaVan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ-ZnajmvFw

Check out this vid. He uses a wide angle camera lens to get rid of the black bars.
SomeCreepinaVan is offline  
post #24 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 04:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 1,628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCreepinaVan View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ-ZnajmvFw

Check out this vid. He uses a wide angle camera lens to get rid of the black bars.

I like how he fails to mention the lense he is using. Fails to show a closeup of the screen, and insists on talking like the ****** from caddy shack.

Something smells off with this video.
SiggUA likes this.
Verge2 is online now  
post #25 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 01:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jrwhite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Indian River, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCreepinaVan View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ-ZnajmvFw

Check out this vid. He uses a wide angle camera lens to get rid of the black bars.

the only thing the guy in this video is doing is shortening the throw of the 3010 to create an image that fills his wall with 2.35 content. 1.77 content can't be displayed with this type of setup unless you use a scaler.

I did some experimenting with camcorder wide angle converter lenses quite a number of years ago. In the end, it's easier and less expensive to use a 'mirror' setup. Here's the thread if you're interested

Short Throw Lens

Jonathan
jrwhite is offline  
post #26 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 01:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AV_Integrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA - Washington, DC
Posts: 3,061
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCreepinaVan View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ-ZnajmvFw

Check out this vid. He uses a wide angle camera lens to get rid of the black bars.
No, he doesn't.

The black bars are still above and below the image, but you can't see them because he's just projecting on his wall. (floor/ceiling)

This is the same 'zoom method' poor mans anamorphic setup which is described above. It means that everytime you go from 2.35:1 to 1.78:1 and back you will have to adjust the projector manually because the 3020 has no motorized features to help automate this task.

Unlike an anamorphic lens, this lens just does the same thing as zooming out to a more wide-angle position with the lens which is already on the projector, or by moving the projector further away from the screen. It doesn't do anything more.

I would not use or ever recommend this horrible method of doing this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Theater, whole house audio, and technology installation in the Washington DC metro area.
AV_Integrated is online now  
post #27 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 01:39 PM
Senior Member
 
wyen78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Agg View Post

Or does anybody else have experience with a lumagen radiance XD they could chime in with please smile.gif ?

Also don't forget that some movies are variable aspect...very very few movies.

The issue as another poster has gone over is that in using this zoom method to get 2.35 ratio is that 16:9 material is smaller. The reason to go with CIH setup is (room requirements aside) you like that effect, watch something on 16:9, and then open up the screen to display 2.35 in all it's glory. I was considering getting the panny 8k (I have to have 3D, I used to not be a big fan until I saw 3D at home on a DLP projector).

Unfortunately I love the movie Batman: Dark Knight and it is (or at least it was originally) shown with variable aspect ratio. Same with the 3rd batman, and at least 1 of the transformer movies. And to be honest, I am probably in the minority but I really like the effect when it's done well to showcase a particular part of the movie. As bad as teh second transformers movie was, the part where Optimus gets tackled and the screen switches to 16:9 in the forest where optimus starts handing out ass-whuppins....love it.

With a movie like this you'd have to use the 16:9. So you'd have a small 16:9 (due to CIH with the 2.35 screen), then that would be letterboxed making it even smaller. Good news is that very very few movies are shot like this. I also would like sporting events on tv to be huge, I think I will go with 16:9 and just figure out a way to mask the top and bottom. The only real negative with this is that 16:9 screen has to be huge to make 2.35 aspect ratio look good since so much of the screen is chopped off.

wyen78 is offline  
post #28 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 02:01 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Ben Agg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wyen,

I thought about that also , I think for me the best option is probably going to get a panny 4k/7k/8k , and have a mounted 2.35 screen but also have a seperate 16:9 pulldown screen in front of it , curtains on the side of the 2.35 screen. I would really like an anamorphic lens but from what I am hearing they START at like $3,000 and I can expect to pay over $5,000 which is kinda a bummer I cant justify paying that much for a lens just yet.

2.35 mounted screen with a 16:9 pulldown infront of it
Panny 4k,7k,8k

just use the memory zoom and switch screen on content.

Yeh I never use full 1080p on 2.35 content but I wont have to fork out $3k/$5k on an anamorphic lens just yet. Thoughts?
Ben Agg is offline  
post #29 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 02:34 PM
Senior Member
 
wyen78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I honestly think that buying an anamorphic lens just doesn't make a lot of sense for most people. If you have a dedicated room with high end gear and have a theater that looks like it should be on a magazine cover, then sure, by all means. But the average consumer looking for a projector is probably buying something in the under 1k-2.5k range. At this price range I think most home theaters would get greater benefit from using that money for higher end projector. Heck, my projector, plasma tv, front, center, sub, surrounds, ps3 together cost about 3k so there's obviously a lot of improvements I could make with 3K that don't include a lens.

Why not just the 16:9 screen and mask letterbox for 2.35, I mean, if you're going to have both screens why not just buy 1 that can do both unless it is a matter of vertical space in your room.

wyen78 is offline  
post #30 of 30 Old 05-29-2013, 09:51 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Agg View Post

Wyen,

I thought about that also , I think for me the best option is probably going to get a panny 4k/7k/8k , and have a mounted 2.35 screen but also have a seperate 16:9 pulldown screen in front of it , curtains on the side of the 2.35 screen. I would really like an anamorphic lens but from what I am hearing they START at like $3,000 and I can expect to pay over $5,000 which is kinda a bummer I cant justify paying that much for a lens just yet.

2.35 mounted screen with a 16:9 pulldown infront of it
Panny 4k,7k,8k

just use the memory zoom and switch screen on content.

Yeh I never use full 1080p on 2.35 content but I wont have to fork out $3k/$5k on an anamorphic lens just yet. Thoughts?

You can sometimes find refurbished lens' for under a grand. I did! Picked up a C-Stock for about $600 I think.

There's also the Panamorph Cinevista, which can be had for just over $1k I think.

www.panamorph.com/cinevista

Or watch the classifieds and Ebay for a used one. I believe there is one on AVS right now, unless it was sold, but the ad is still up.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1457268/prismasonic-h-1200r-motorized-anamorphic-lens.
biliam1982 is offline  
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Tags
Optoma Hd33 1080p 3d Projector
Gear in this thread - 1080p by PriceGrabber.com

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