or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › Carada, Da-Lite And Stewart Screen Material Test Results
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Carada, Da-Lite And Stewart Screen Material Test Results

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
The attached file contains results of screen material tests for some Carda, Da-Lite and Stewart screen materials.

The screen materials tested in this report in no way encompass all of the materials on the market, but does explore some of the products from Carada, Da-Lite and Steward. These include the Classic Cinema White and Brilliant White from Carada. Da-lite materials include Cinema Vision, Video Spectra 1.5, Da-Mat®, HD Progressive 0.6 and the HD Progressive 0.9. Stewart Filmscreen materials included StudioTek 130 G3, FireHawk G3, and SnoMatte 100. Data in this report includes results from previous tests to make it easier to compare results for various products.

 

AccuCal Front Projection Screen Report.pdf 182.525390625k . file
post #2 of 23
Thanks Jeff. Nice results.

They look fairly close in the results, but any subjective impressions of the Carada CCW vs the Stewart SnoMatte 100?

--Darin
post #3 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Thanks Jeff. Nice results.

They look fairly close in the results, but any subjective impressions of the Carada CCW vs the Stewart SnoMatte 100?

--Darin

The SnoMatte is a notch brighter and smoother with no visible artifacts. Not sure it is worth the cost, but it is better.
post #4 of 23
Awesome review Jeff, Thank's for posting your White papers...

Your Screen Reviews will Aid people immensely in choosing A screen for its performance attributes & there viewing environment as this question constantly comes up...

Cheers....
post #5 of 23
Thread Starter 
I hope to add to this list each month. I will also look at AT material since I have great audio tools as well.
post #6 of 23
Thank you Jeff!

It's interesting: it seems to me the consistancy of gain on and off axis is fairly close between the Carada CCW, BW and the Stewart SnoMatte. Yet the SnoMatte is always accompanied by warnings "Only for use in a total bat cave" whereas plenty have used the CCW and BW quite happily in non-bat-cave rooms. In other words, I know the Snomatte has a wide angle of reflection, but I'm wondering if the "It won't really work well unless you are in a velvet lined room" warnings are over blown.

I've had the Carada BW material and now the Studiotek ST-130 G3 material.
I really like both materials. The ST-130 has the added gain which gets me to a "just right" level of brightness for my taste in my room. And fortunately I find the change in off-axis brightness as I move to different seats subtle enough that it doesn't stick out and bother me, so it's a great combo in that respect.

The only mild issue I have is that I do indeed see the optical coating on some content. Many people have said it's "invisible" and you won't have to worry about sparklies, but it's still there. Just not nearly as intense as the Firehawk screen surface.

The Carada BW surface was beautiful, although I did notice a slight sheen on that material as well, with certain images (e.g. bright areas). But it struck me as a bit different. For whatever reason, I seem to percieve the sheen of the Carada BW material as occuring "behind" the image, sort of like "Ok, now I can see the surface of the screen that the image is shining on to."

Whereas with the sparkly optical coating used by Stewart and other manufacturers, I perceive the texture as overlaying the image, occuring just in front of it like I'm looking through a slightly granular layer.

I seem to remember the BW sheen to come off as slightly more beneign in that regard.

I love the ST-130 material. I'll likely get along ok with seeing the optical coating here and there. But just the fact I can see it has my interest piqued by materials like the Stewart SnoMatte/ST-100 material.
post #7 of 23
Nice work Jeff!

Yes, uncoated PVC is the perfect material. If we only had 3000 lumen projectors with 100,000:1 contrast we would all use one.
post #8 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Thank you Jeff!

It's interesting: it seems to me the consistancy of gain on and off axis is fairly close between the Carada CCW, BW and the Stewart SnoMatte. Yet the SnoMatte is always accompanied by warnings "Only for use in a total bat cave" whereas plenty have used the CCW and BW quite happily in non-bat-cave rooms. In other words, I know the Snomatte has a wide angle of reflection, but I'm wondering if the "It won't really work well unless you are in a velvet lined room" warnings are over blown......

I would not say a velvet lined room is necessary, but care with reflections is a good idea. I was at Sony in Culver City last week and saw most of their screening rooms. They were using Stewart screens that appeared to be low gain, but the rooms were no where near a cave.

Care of use for the SnoMatte would be similar to any low gain material.
post #9 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tryg View Post

Nice work Jeff!

Yes, uncoated PVC is the perfect material. If we only had 3000 lumen projectors with 100,000:1 contrast we would all use one.

You could go smaller if you want to use one.
post #10 of 23
Excellent tests! For the defacto standard any chance of getting your hands on Da-lite's matte white screen for a measure or two.
post #11 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughman View Post

Excellent tests! For the defacto standard any chance of getting your hands on Da-lite's matte white screen for a measure or two.

I have it here at home. I could do it next month.

I have looked at it and it is no SnoMatte.
post #12 of 23
Nice work. I'm surprised that the Firehawk G3 was < 1 gain at 0 degrees vs. it's rating of 1.25 gain while the StudioTek was close to Stewart's rated gain of 1.3. Any thoughts on that? The room setup?
post #13 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewski11 View Post

Nice work. I'm surprised that the Firehawk G3 was < 1 gain at 0 degrees vs. it's rating of 1.25 gain while the StudioTek was close to Stewart's rated gain of 1.3. Any thoughts on that? The room setup?

If you look at the chart supplied by Stewart the gain is very dependent on angle. I suspect it has to do with the mounting situation, but at no time did it look brighter than the Carada CCW. It was a big dissapointment.
post #14 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

The attached file contains results of screen material tests for some Carda, Da-Lite and Stewart screen materials.

The screen materials tested in this report in no way encompass all of the materials on the market, but does explore some of the products from Carada, Da-Lite and Steward. These include the Classic Cinema White and Brilliant White from Carada. Da-lite materials include Cinema Vision, Video Spectra 1.5, Da-Mat®, HD Progressive 0.6 and the HD Progressive 0.9. Stewart Filmscreen materials included StudioTek 130 G3, FireHawk G3, and SnoMatte 100. Data in this report includes results from previous tests to make it easier to compare results for various products.

Jeff,

Thanks for providing this excellent report!

I would like one clarification if you don't mind.

You define your 18-degree measurement as "Measurements at this angle were taken 18 degrees to the side and 6 degrees down, but are of the same location as the 0 degree point on the screen."

You also say that "the projector in this case was ceiling mounted in the center of the screen horizontally and vertically above the screen."

So, I am clear that 18 degrees to the side is with respect to the light path from the projector, because the projector is centered with respect to the screen.

Is the "6 degrees down" with respect to a line perpendicular to the screen surface, or with respect to the light path from the projector to the screen?

I would guess that it is with respect to a line perpendicular to the screen surface because with a ceiling mounted projector and measuring a spot 32.5" below the center of projection, it would be hard to get just 6 degrees between the light path and the viewer.

If the "6 degrees down" is with respect to a line perpendicular to the screen surface, what is the angle between the light path from the projector to the screen and the screen to the viewer (the total angle of reflection)?

Thanks,

--Mark
post #15 of 23
Thread Starter 
It is from the screen. I have not calculated the other angle, but it would be a pretty typical ceiling situation from what I have seen. These values are shown as typical values for real seat locations for a ceiling mount.
post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

It is from the screen. I have not calculated the other angle, but it would be a pretty typical ceiling situation from what I have seen. These values are shown as typical values for real seat locations for a ceiling mount.

I'm not sure what "a pretty typical ceiling situation" is. I've seen theaters with 6.5' ceilings and others with 12' ceilings. There is certainly a very large difference here.

If you could provide the following measurements, I can figure out the angles:

* Distance from screen to measuring device (I think you listed this as 9')
* Distance from lens to screen
* Distance from center of projector lens to floor
* Distance from measuring device to floor
* Distance from measuring point (on the screen) to the floor

--Mark
post #17 of 23
does anyone have a stewart snomatte-studiotek 100 that would care to comment on how it handles some lighting, say in the back of the room not close to the pj or screen
post #18 of 23
Good afternoon...I messaged UMR, but then realized I should have posted this question.

I just want to make sure I am reading the report correctly.

If a MFG CLAIMS his screen material is 1.3 gain and the REPORT says 0 degree gain is 1.04 and then 18 degree gain is .95 I assume the MFG is over stating their gain ? Is that what the report is saying ?
post #19 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

The Carada BW surface was beautiful, although I did notice a slight sheen on that material as well, with certain images (e.g. bright areas).

That's a bit odd, because my 115" Brilliant White screen does not have ANY hint of sheen to it; it's not optically coated, so I'm wondering if they (Carada) changed the material over the years. Mine is 6 months old or less and LOVE IT. It is surprising that the zero degree gain was 1.06, when the specs say 1.4. OK, it doesn't surprise me; all these Mgrs are bloating up their specs
post #20 of 23
I still play around with the idea of getting an ST-100 screen material.

But...does anyone know how the ST100 would do with 3D images? I know my ST130 is supposed to be ok (in terms of polarization) but I don't know about the ST-100.

Thanks.
post #21 of 23
I played around a bit with my screen samples - small ones unfortunately. I have a totally light controlled room and currently use the ST130 in my set up. First thing about the ST-100 snow matte material is that even it has some tiny sparklies when viewed from several inches away. Though not that my eye picked up from further away.

Pixel resolution was very clearly better on the ST-100 vs the other screen samples that had gain, e.g. the firehawk etc. Though the difference between the ST-100 and the ST-130 was pretty marginal in that respect.

I was actually expecting the ST-100 material to look a bit more washed out than the ST-130 material, but to my surprise it consistently looked a tiny bit better in contrast. Only looking at the sample (which can be quite misleading) it was the best material I've seen. One day I might try this material....
post #22 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by toofast68 View Post

If a MFG CLAIMS his screen material is 1.3 gain and the REPORT says 0 degree gain is 1.04 and then 18 degree gain is .95 I assume the MFG is over stating their gain ? Is that what the report is saying ?

That could be a reasonable conclusion given how far off they are, but rated gain is generally the peak gain. This document says that the 0 degree gain was for an angle perpendicular to the screen. With the projector on the ceiling and the meter much lower this wouldn't generally be the peak gain except for a screen with the same gain to everywhere.

For an angular reflective screen the peak gain would normally be where a mirror in the screen's place would give the brightest image. That wouldn't be perpendicular to the screen with the projector high, meter much lower, and screen straight up and down, so perpendicular would generally measure lower than peak gain.

Some cases where the measurement would likely be much lower than the peak gain would be retro-reflective screens like the Da-Lite High Power. A 0 degree angle for measuring its rated gain would be at the projector. Since in the chart here 0 degree gain is for a horizontal offset of 0, but a large vertical offset, you wouldn't expect to get the rated gain.

--Darin
post #23 of 23
Nowhere in the report that I find Carada Brilliant White. Where does it fit in?
I plan to replace my 120' Da-lite HCCV 1.1 gain. The reason is it uses cheap fabric materail at the borders that shows off light spilled over it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Screens
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › Carada, Da-Lite And Stewart Screen Material Test Results