AVS Forum banner

New High Contrast High Power Discussion Thread

48K views 428 replies 66 participants last post by  stephenbr 
#1 ·
 http://www.da-lite.com/products/sele...viewMode=front

Quote:
High Contrast High Power



This revolutionary screen surface provides a unique combination of high gain along with contrast enhancement due to its grey base and highly reflective top surface. The result is a screen surface with moderate viewing angles and the ability to reflect light back towards the source. These characteristics make this surface an excellent choice for environments with a moderate amount of ambient light and a projector which is placed on a table top or in the same horizontal viewing plane as the audience. Flame retardant and mildew resistant. Viewing Angle: 20° Gain: 2.4

...discuss


I figure rather then mess up the other HP thread even further , keep things here?
 
#227 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksbarnz /forum/post/21308131


Just installed my new da-lite high contrast high power screen. Two words: Awesome Sauce. I have a Panasonic AW-7000 projector. The image is brighter, clearer and has much more pop than my old matte white screen. I can light up a 133 inch screen with the lamp on eco and the picture set to rec 709 and the image is bright and clear. Another big plus is that 3d is much much brighter when compared to my old screen. If your viewing set up fits it's limitations I highly recommend it!

How are the black levels compared to the matte white?
 
#228 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore /forum/post/0



How are the black levels compared to the matte white?

blacks seem much better to me. One thing I noticed is that this screen really limits the light reflecting off the walls. Before with the white screen the walls would light up. Now it is much more of a focused beam of light to my theater seats and a lot less light scatter.
 
#229 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by eishg /forum/post/0


Hi,


Im about to buy one of these to go with the new epson 3010, im looking to get a 77 inch model and shelf mount it.


I asked about this to one sales guy to get a quote, this is what they told me:


"For a manual roller screen of this size I would advise you to steer clear of a high gain surface. The surface on a small roller screen will never be completely flat and this can cause noticeable variations in brightness in the image and possibly spoil your viewing pleasure"


is this true?

With a screen that small and the 3010 being a light canon you might find the HCHP makes the image too bright. Have you looked into a low gain gray screen? Maybe the high contrast cinema vision?
 
#230 ·
I am having a hard time deciding between these three (2.8 vs the two 2.4s) I plan to have a 110" wide scope screen, with both projector (undecided atm, probably a JVC or Panasonic) and seats at 17'. The screen will be almost touching the ceiling and the two walls on either side - walls and ceiling are all off-white.


Seating will be a 7' wide couch, with most of the viewing 4' wide.


The projector will be about 14" above eye level and 10" above the bottom of the screen, with eye level thus below the screen (sometimes even more so for minors).


My biggest issues are the walls (otherwise light controlled room), and the seating width and height.


thanks in advance
 
#231 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by eishg /forum/post/21308449


have you had a chance to review it?

I have received the screen, but been too busy to really write anything up.


The main difference I noted compared to HP2.4 was that the colors seemed to be more vivid. I guess it can have something to do with less reflections bouncing back on the screen and washing out (or diluting) the colors on the screen.


Black level wise, I can't say I notice much difference. However, this is from memory alone, which makes it a bit unreliable. No night and day difference at least. Maybe the walls and ceiling being lighted up more from the HP2.4 aids in keeping my pupil dilated and this helps perceiving dark greys as blacks. I guess a measurement would show that I in reality have better blacks on screen.


The viewing angles are not as bad as I have feared from watching the screen sample. The sample indicated that the picture would be unwatchable more than a meter or so to the side, but it isn't so. Even sitting far off to the side produces a watchable image, albeit far less punchy and bright. From my 3.5 m viewing distance I would say four people could fit more or less in the sweet spot, another two with dimmer views but still absolutely OK PQ and two more with less enjoyable picture on the far sides. I guess not having anything to compare (as you do with a screen sample) makes you less sensitive to any brightness drop with the full screen.


Even though it directs light it still throws around quite a lot so the ceiling and walls light up quite a bit. It's nothing like a back-projection TV where the image almost disappears when viewing from the side.


Homogeneity is great from all viewing angles and distances. No hotspotting detected. The screen structure is very fine, but visible in bright material. However, MUCH less so than for instance a Firehawk.


All in all I'm very satisfied.


I will try to take some pics with different screen materials as comparison when I get the time.


BR
 
#232 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/0



I have received the screen, but been too busy to really write anything up.


The main difference I noted compared to HP2.4 was that the colors seemed to be more vivid. I guess it can have something to do with less reflections bouncing back on the screen and washing out (or diluting) the colors on the screen.


Black level wise, I can't say I notice much difference. However, this is from memory alone, which makes it a bit unreliable. No night and day difference at least. Maybe the walls and ceiling being lighted up more from the HP2.4 aids in keeping my pupil dilated and this helps perceiving dark greys as blacks. I guess a measurement would show that I in reality have better blacks on screen.


The viewing angles are not as bad as I have feared from watching the screen sample. The sample indicated that the picture would be unwatchable more than a meter or so to the side, but it isn't so. Even sitting far off to the side produces a watchable image, albeit far less punchy and bright. From my 3.5 m viewing distance I would say four people could fit more or less in the sweet spot, another two with dimmer views but still absolutely OK PQ and two more with less enjoyable picture on the far sides. I guess not having anything to compare (as you do with a screen sample) makes you less sensitive to any brightness drop with the full screen.


Even though it directs light it still throws around quite a lot so the ceiling and walls light up quite a bit. It's nothing like a back-projection TV where the image almost disappears when viewing from the side.


Homogeneity is great from all viewing angles and distances. No hotspotting detected. The screen structure is very fine, but visible in bright material. However, MUCH less so than for instance a Firehawk.


All in all I'm very satisfied.


I will try to take some pics with different screen materials as comparison when I get the time.


BR

Excellent review. You said the HCHP reflects less light to the floor and ceiling than a normal 2.4 HP. How much less? Can you estimate a % improvement? I know my 2.8 HP reflects lots of light.


You stated the HCHP has a very fine screen structure. Do you think it's fine enough to not impede the resolution of a 4k projector?


This last question is directed to anyone on the board who knows the answer : Will a 1.0 or 1.3 angular reflective screen light up the room walls and ceiling less or more than a retroreflective HP?


Thanks
 
#234 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg1292 /forum/post/21228236


As far as black diamond which I sell is the light rejection king but I don't

like the increased artifacts intoduced into the screen by the 1.4BD.

can you (or others) comment a bit more on this? i'm replacing a 1.4 g3 bd screen now (doesn't play well with my pj in 3d, plus want a bit bigger screen) and am trying to decide between a hp or a hphc... one of the things i'd like to eliminate is the visible screen structure of the bd in bright scenes... while it's not overly bothersome, i wouldn't mind it going away on the new screen... side note to rich: you were right about this...


furthermore, if anyone would like to comment on "which one"... i can position my pj "properly" for the screen, it's easy enough to drop my shelf a couple feet and get it in the proper plane... also, i only have 2 seats (reclining couch), so i do not think viewing cone should be an issue...


i use my pj for everything... sports and movies only (and mythbusters
)...


the screenwall and the front 6 feet of my room is black, including ceiling (rest of it is grey walls with white ceiling)... blackout curtains over windows and door... i have track lights over the seating position that i use when watching sports, varying from "full on" to "pretty dim" (usually "reasonably dim" most of the time) depending on my mood, i'm not fond of sitting in the dark for that... movies watched in darkness...


i'm leaning towards the high contrast due to the "sports in light" requirement, and that is at least 75% of my usage...


i have some samples on the way, but wouldn't mind some "real world experience" input from owners...



tia.
 
#236 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21322663


From my 3.5 m viewing distance I would say four people could fit more or less in the sweet spot, another two with dimmer views but still absolutely OK PQ and two more with less enjoyable picture on the far sides. I guess not having anything to compare (as you do with a screen sample) makes you less sensitive to any brightness drop with the full screen.

After having played with the viewing angles one more time I think I would have to adjust my comment slightly. Three people in width in the sweet spot (in a sofa), two extra with less bright image, and people further out than that will get a watchable but dull image. You can of course fit more people in the sweet spot if you have several rows.
 
#237 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj /forum/post/21333526


can you (or others) comment a bit more on this? i'm replacing a 1.4 g3 bd screen now (doesn't play well with my pj in 3d, plus want a bit bigger screen) and am trying to decide between a hp or a hphc... one of the things i'd like to eliminate is the visible screen structure of the bd in bright scenes... while it's not overly bothersome, i wouldn't mind it going away on the new screen... side note to rich: you were right about this...

The screen structure is the same on the HP2.4 and the HCHP. And it's very subtle, you can't compare it to a BD.


With only two seats, I would go for the HCHP. You won't need the wider viewing cone and you would get more vivid colors.

Quote:
furthermore, if anyone would like to comment on "which one"... i can position my pj "properly" for the screen, it's easy enough to drop my shelf a couple feet and get it in the proper plane... also, i only have 2 seats (reclining couch), so i do not think viewing cone should be an issue...

The HP is a bit less fuzzy with placement, but if you only have two seats you won't have any trouble with either.

Quote:
i use my pj for everything... sports and movies only (and mythbusters
)...


the screenwall and the front 6 feet of my room is black, including ceiling (rest of it is grey walls with white ceiling)... blackout curtains over windows and door... i have track lights over the seating position that i use when watching sports, varying from "full on" to "pretty dim" (usually "reasonably dim" most of the time) depending on my mood, i'm not fond of sitting in the dark for that... movies watched in darkness...


i'm leaning towards the high contrast due to the "sports in light" requirement, and that is at least 75% of my usage...

Neither are good in ambient light. The light rejection is about the same as an ordinary white screen (i.e. none). Only difference is that you get a brighter image as if you were having a brighter projector.


Still, watching mythbusters or sports lights up my room quite a lot so there is no sitting in the dark with this kind of program material in my room at least. Someone with very dark walls and ceiling might have a problem however. I don't think it will be an issue for you. The screen will light up your room quite a bit and you can also use the track lights if they're directed away from the screen.
 
#238 ·
^^^


thanks for the detailed reply...
food for thought...
 
#239 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21334872


Neither are good in ambient light. The light rejection is about the same as an ordinary white screen (i.e. none). Only difference is that you get a brighter image as if you were having a brighter projector.

If the unwanted light is coming from an off-angle and the projected light from a good angle for the viewer then the high power screens should do a fair amount better than an ordinary white screen as far as rejecting that light (maintaining the contrast ratio that the projector puts out). Of course, it is easy to have too much ambient light for just about any screen to handle, although some have extremely low gain for some angles and so do well at rejecting light from there.


For reflected light from the screen the HCHP should be one of the best screens around for maintaining ANSI CR in a light colored room when sitting in a good viewing position for it, since the screen has both directionality and a gray layer to help reject those reflections when they come back to the screen.


--Darin
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ericglo
#240 ·
Just to add to Darins post, here are two images I posted on page two of this thread showing the potential ambient light rejection attributes of the HCHP as compared to a HP 2.8, HP 2.4, da-mat, all taped to a 1 ish gain screen. The HCHP is the smaller central screen, 2.8 just above, 2.4 just below and the da-mat lower left. Just want to illustrate, again, that statements such as Drexlers do not accurately repesentative the HCHP's ambient light rejecting attributes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21334872


Neither are good in ambient light. The light rejection is about the same as an ordinary white screen (i.e. none). Only difference is that you get a brighter image as if you were having a brighter projector

The photo with lights on is with a total of 6 on high, two up front you can see in the photo, two mid room, and two in the back corners. The pj is off, no flash is used therefore all light reflected from the screens is ambient emanating from around the room with weighting to the front lights.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue Rain
#241 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 /forum/post/21338944


...

For reflected light from the screen the HCHP should be one of the best screens around for maintaining ANSI CR in a light colored room when sitting in a good viewing position for it, since the screen has both directionality and a gray layer to help reject those reflections when they come back to the screen.


--Darin

I would, though, caution persons to check out the HCHP with samples from Dalite to verify that its very narrow viewing cone doesn't lead to brightness variation from their viewing position. Even though I have basically just one viewing position, since I sit rather close (1.0 SW) to a large screen, my RS20 has to be ~ 4-5 ft behind my head (so that I can do the zoom method for 2.35, going to a 144"W pic).


In my case, the samples of HCHP showed brightness fall off at the left and right edges of the screen; maybe not noticeable on viewing real material, but it was definitely noticeable with a white screen. The HP2.4, though, was perfectly uniform in brightness (due to its somewhat wider viewing cone). Also, since I have black absorbing material on the ceiling and side walls (out ~8ft from the screen wall), I am not concerned with the more side wall reflected light the HP2.4 might have over the HCHP.
 
#242 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 /forum/post/21338944


If the unwanted light is coming from an off-angle and the projected light from a good angle for the viewer then the high power screens should do a fair amount better than an ordinary white screen as far as rejecting that light (maintaining the contrast ratio that the projector puts out). Of course, it is easy to have too much ambient light for just about any screen to handle, although some have extremely low gain for some angles and so do well at rejecting light from there.--Darin

One might think it does in theory, but IRL it doesn't.


You get an improved contrast ratio due to the image being brighter, but that's about it. The screen is not darker than a normal 1.0 gain white screen when exposed to light from the sides (well the HCHP is ever so slightly darker due to its light grey substrate). However comparing a HP or HCHP in side light to a FireHawk and we're talking night and day differences.


I will take some shots and post when I get back from work.


BR
 
#243 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21340495


One might think it does in theory, but IRL it doesn't.


You get an improved contrast ratio due to the image being brighter, but that's about it.

I disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21340495


The screen is not darker than a normal 1.0 gain white screen when exposed to light from the sides ...

The 2.8 gain white drops to around .6 or .5 gain at large angles. If you have a light colored room and get secondary reflections then it will complicate things, but the 2.8 gain High Power does have lower gain for the first reflection from side light at a big angle than a true 1.0 gain screen to a center viewer. The high gain for on-axis light doesn't magically appear, it comes with lower gain than 1.0 gain for certain angles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21340495


(well the HCHP is ever so slightly darker due to its light grey substrate).

Of course it depends on your definition of "ever so slightly" but I would say that the HCHP has much lower gain for side light from a big angle than a true 1.0 gain screen. I could measure it probably this weekend, but I don't think there is any way it is even .5 gain (it would be lower than that for a viewer in the center).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/21340495


However comparing a HP or HCHP in side light to a FireHawk and we're talking night and day differences.

I could see that with certain angles where the Firehawk hotspots so much that it is a viewer on the opposite side from the side light and at the same angle who gets most of that gain. If the side light was a little to the side instead of way to the side then the Firehawk can actually show pretty high gain for that light to a viewer sitting in the center and looking at that side of the screen. This is if the angle works out with high gain to that spot on the screen with the angular-reflective Firehawk. This is a case where I would expect the HCHP to have less of an issue.


In the past I measured ANSI CR retention in my setup with off-white walls and the Optoma Graywolf (retro-reflective and gray for 1.4 gain rating) resulted in higher ANSI CR measurements for a viewer in a high gain position compared to my Firehawk in the same room. I expect that the HCHP would do about as well as the Graywolf or even better for this test in the same room, but I haven't measured it yet.


I'm not sure that I have the numbers perfectly right, but I recall that the Graywolf resulted in something like 140:1 ANSI CR to a center position in this off-white colored room, where I would expect a basic matte white would end up at less than 50:1 ANSI CR based on other measurements. This was I believe using a projector that put out over 500:1 ANSI CR.


--Darin
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ericglo
#244 ·
glad i asked the question and prompted a discussion...



for reference, a couple pics of the room... the windows and door have blackout curtains, they aren't shown, i took these while i was painting...





 
#245 ·
darinp2


After examining it again: Looking at light only coming from the side I think you're right with the HCHP at least. It is significantly darker than white screens and the Firehawk is very dependent on the seating position. However, the 2.4 and 2.8 HP don't fare as well.


This is the setup: A diffuse light is shining from the side at the screen.
Attachment 230754


The screen is the HCHP


Samples from left to right:

FireHawk G3

HP2.4

HP2.8

Studiotek 130

Da-lite Matte white gain 1.0

Firehawk.


The pics are taken from different sides of the couch:
Attachment 230751
Attachment 230752


As you say, the Firehawk samples have very different brightness, which of course is due to their angular reflective nature. However, the HP2.4 and 2.8 samples are only slightly darker than the white screens.


 
#246 ·
ok, my samples of both the hp and hphc arrived today...


played around with them for awhile... big difference from the bd (plus my 3d issue doesn't exist, yay!)...


both of my seats will be within the 20 degree viewing cone for the hphc (measuring from the sides of the couch gives a potential 15 degree "maximum", assuming i remember my high school geometry right
) once i lower the projector to the correct level...


any real advantage at that point to going with the "regular" over the hc?


i'm leaning towards the hc... blacks defintely wash out less with ambient with it...


thanks again for all the commentary...
 
#247 ·
fwiw...


i ordered the hphc from mike at avs today...


reports to come...
 
#248 ·
I've started to notice some issues with my HCHP screen and was wondering if any other owners were experiencing what I am. On bright scenes the image is not uniformly bright. There are slightly darker spots all over the screen. I have already had the screen replaced once due to this and the replacement had the same issue. You can see what I am referring to in the pics of a 100 percent white window being shown. It is almost as if the screen is dirty. Other than this issue I love the screen but I am worried my third screen (second replacement) will have the same issue. I am thinking of going with the regular high power instead. I sent the pics to da-lite and they said to have the screen replaced again. My non-scientific guess is that the reflective surface is not uniform across the screen and the darker spots are where the gray back is showing through.


 
#249 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksbarnz /forum/post/21357547


I've started to notice some issues with my HCHP screen and was wondering if any other owners were experiencing what I am. On bright scenes the image is not uniformly bright. There are slightly darker spots all over the screen. I have already had the screen replaced once due to this and the replacement had the same issue. You can see what I am referring to in the pics of a 100 percent white window being shown. It is almost as if the screen is dirty. Other than this issue I love the screen but I am worried my third screen (second replacement) will have the same issue. I am thinking of going with the regular high power instead. I sent the pics to da-lite and they said to have the screen replaced again. My non-scientific guess is that the reflective surface is not uniform across the screen and the darker spots are where the gray back is showing through.

I noticed brightness falloff of the HCHP when testing samples I received from Dalite (put up at the corners of my intended screen), which I attributed to the much narrower viewing cone compared to the std HP2.4 (which did not show this falloff). For this reason I got the std HP.


Now this may be because I sit rather close to a large screen (11 ft from a 12 ft wide one), so the pj has to be ~ 5-6 ft behind my head. The relevant viewing angle (between the 2 lines from pj and eye to a point on the screen) thus varies at various points on the screen more so than if the pj were close up behind my head. So I decided that I needed the std HP which works better for my situation.
 
#250 ·
I haven't noticed any difference in uniformity specifically at the corners. I sit 17' back, projector is 19' back and 1' above my head, so that might have something to do with it. The darker spots are across the entire screen, middle and sides. I saw from a previous post that you have a dedicated theater room with black curtains on the walls beside the screen as well as the wall behind your seating. I too have this setup. Black velvet curtains 4' out of each side of the screen,. black rug 5' out from the screen and the entire back wall is covered in black curtains. My walls and ceiling are also dark gray.


My biggest reason for going with the HCHP was it being a gray screen and it helping with the perceived black levels. I have a sample of the regular HP which I tested out a little bit last night. I didn't notice much difference in a 0 - 20 ire test pattern between the HCHP and the regular sample. Now one thing I did notice about the HCHP compared to my matte white screen is that it was very good at limiting reflections from the screen to the walls, which might be the contributing factor to the improved black levels. Maybe the regular HP with its slightly larger viewing cone will still possess these properties? I love the HCHP screen, but am worried about getting another with the same problem. I'm also wondering if the regular HP will provide just as good an image in my setup.
 
#251 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksbarnz /forum/post/21357827


... Now one thing I did notice about the HCHP compared to my matte white screen is that it was very good at limiting reflections from the screen to the walls, which might be the contributing factor to the improved black levels. Maybe the regular HP with its slightly larger viewing cone will still possess these properties? ...

I imagine that the std HP will have more reflections from side walls, but as you noted, I have absorbing side wall and ceiling coverings, so for me that is not an issue.


I think both the std HP and HCDP 2.4's are excellent screens. I even like mine better than my earlier HP2.8--which I also liked very much--in that I think the new HP gives a smoother image.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top