Epson 8700UB vs 5010 for large screen - Page 2

Have to disagree with coderguy's flat claim that anything below 12 ftL is somehow across the board unacceptable.

I watch on a BOC screen (around .8 gain) with a calibrated Mits HC4000 in Low lamp; 16:9 is at 110". Coderguy's calculator says I'm getting 6-something ftL (1000 hours on lamp). When I watch 2.35 stuff, my CIH screen is 10.5' wide which gives me an effective 16:9 image of 142" and around 4 ftL.

Not once has anyone said the picture seems dim or anything. My friends spend more time at another friend's watching his 106" Studiotek 130 1.3 gain screen with his JVC RS35 in a 100% dedicated batcave of a theater, a much brighter setup than mine, and never once have they had a single complaint about my picture, and in fact have said they prefer the larger screen. I think his looks significantly better, but that's more due to the far superior blacks than the difference in brightness.

I find most movies look excellent. There are some dimmer movies -- Half-Blood Prince, The Road, and oddly 21 Jump Streeet -- where I find myself really wishing for more brightness, but really these are the exception rather than the rule.

Having said all that, I am in fact looking to upgrade to a screen paint with some brightness improvements to get the most out of my projector, but a simple 1.0 gain flat white could conceivably be the route I end up going in the end as well.

The notion that you can't possibly be 100% satisfied with the 8700 with anything less than a Da-Lite 2.5 gain is really ridiculous. Look all over this forum and you will find loads of people getting less than 12 ftL, sometimes much much less, and I'm pretty confident that we are, on the whole, an exceptionally picky bunch.

Not to mention the fact that for a 145" screen, the difference between the 5010 in best mode, low lamp, and the 8700UB in best mode, low lamp, is only about 1 ftL. You might not even notice that difference in a side by side comparison.

Of course the obvious questions for OP are: Do you have a projector now, what kind of ftL are you getting, and are you happy with how that looks?

I run the 8500Ub on my Seymour 153" screen, in best mode-theater black1, and the picture is plenty bright!



Note: that photo was taken with approximately 1000 hours on the bulb.

Photo doesn't do the color correctness justice, bit too red, but looks really good and natural in person.
Edited by Crabalocker - 9/15/12 at 1:42pm

I really did not mean to start anything, I was just trying to NOT get the average person to setup their NEW projector at under 12 fL to 16 FL, I will continue to disagree with most of you, as I prefer a starting fL of around 18-20 fL to account for lamp dimming. I tested this theory several times when calibrating other people's projector. I put the image at 8 fL and at 12 fL and at 16 fL, 4 out of 5 people preferred the brighter image (and the 5th was just being a contrarian). I've just had too many LAMPS DIM on me to want to start the image at 10-12 fL, that's too dim to start IMHO. I know things are still watchable at 8 fL and even 6 fL to an extent, but that isn't my point, the point is that you have already lost a significant amount of POP in the image at those levels, and it only goes downhill from there...

I am not saying to start at 18-20 fL for everyone, it depends on the PJ really, with a JVC I might even start out brighter due to dimming. That said, I cannot recommend for someone to start at anything under 14 fL unless they plan to buy more lamps and 16+ is still preferable (that is based on the average, doesn't mean there aren't exceptions and some will beat the odds, some will).

Mise well have extra brightness to spare, so to me starting at 10-12 fL is senseless, rarely with these projectors do we proclaim, OMG help it's way too bright, yes it does happen, and in that case the ND filter can help temporarily until the lamp wears down. I use my JVC in 3D occasionally, and I've had it around 4-8 fL several times coming from 16 fL , so I am 100% precisely and exactly familiar what it looks like going from 16 fL to 4 fL to 10 fL in a hurry on the same content. It is not the end of the world, but it definitely diminishes the viewing experiences, and I agree in some content it is worse than others. I certainly would not recommend it as a starting point, lol...

My room is very dark, not as dark as my previous theater room, but I have the ceiling and walls COMPLETELY black, carpet is black, sofa is dark chocolate brown, my clothes are often dark or black, etc... That said, the best and darkest theater room I ever had was in a room that was super wide like almost 35' wide and only 20' deep, and it had a vaulted ceiling. This ROOM was better than my current room, because the screen was under the max vault part that was like 20' high, so literally no light could hit the ceiling (and the scattering of light made it better than even the black material I now cover the ceiling with).

Also to the previous point of calibrated vs. a brighter image, I was not meaning to make blanket statements that people will PREFER a calibrated image over a brighter image, actually it's often the opposite (but only to a point and not when things are equalized - see below). My point was people watching most movies will prefer a calibrated image within the same realm of brightness vs. a non-calibrated image, if the calibration is done correctly. I have noted several times in this forum that brightness vs. color accuracy is a tricky calibrating act.

The general public often prefers torch mode in stores more because of the bright lighting and bright objects in the store that the picture is competing against. It is not true that most TV viewers (anyone that watches a lot of TV), actually prefers the TV in torch mode at home in the dark. It is also even less true that most people want to see a movie theater shown in torch mode. It does not take long for the average person to prefer a more accurate image (especially if we go by skin tone accuracy and not just how much POP the color in image looks - which can be adjusted anyhow).

There are exceptions to this as always due to mastering color issues and movies being so far off the standard lighting, but in general the calibrated image wins. Even if someone prefers more intensely looking color in the image, you can increase that a little for them without going way off the standard (while still keeping the other part of the calibration relatively close).
Edited by coderguy - 9/18/12 at 2:12pm

You would need to measure it with a light meter to know, all lamps dim at different rates. The calculator is trying to give an average dimming, but there is a huge margin, for all we know you are still watching the image at 10 fL. The calculator is most accurate on new lamps or in general under 500 hours, after that it becomes a guessing game. Get a light meter for $30 from Amazon.com and test it (don't use the eye-one LT, that is too inaccurate).

Also just because you as a single sample got away with average to below-average lamp dimming, that does not mean the next guy's lamp will have the same experience. Lamp dimming is a huge issue in projectors, one guy's lamp might lose 10% and the next guy's might lose 50% on the same MODEL projector, so now we are supposed to base all brightness measurements in hopes our lamps do not DIM and follow the first example (nope, it should be based on the average samples). Look at LED projectors, the whole point is making the lamp not DIM fast and not having to replace the lamp, so don't even try to tell me this isn't an issue :P
Edited by coderguy - 9/15/12 at 2:55pm