Sunflower State Cinema - Page 3

Tim,

You are welcome to come look at it and I think the more eyes on it the better. Things make a lot more sense when you are standing in the space. I am hoping to do some major work the weekend of the 18th. And I don't know what I am doing. If you do have time to help that would be awesome but I understand either way. No obligation.

I think I am going to sound proof too because once the theater is done it is nearly impossible to change my mind and I have heard that it can be highly advantageous if done properly.

The HVAC stuff is good to know. I don't have mine figured out yet but if I end up ripping out the existing drywall it will be much easier to do right.

The screen is 9 ft wide and I can't get much wider without running into viewing problems with the side seats (if I want to get in 5 seats in the back row) because my speakers are set in front of my screen and angled in. I could go a little wider (and I might) but my front seat is only 9.5 ft from the screen so that makes for a viewing angle of just over 50 degrees. That is a pretty big viewing angle. I like it that way but they do say that the screen always shrinks so maybe I should go even bigger.

Another thing about the screen is that I want to do a constant image area setup so the screen you probably saw was 2.35. My 1.78 image will be 8 inches taller (4 on top and 4 on bottom) but not as wide.

Thanks for the feedback. Keep'em coming.

CIH, CIW, and CIA

Here is my take on screen ratios. Whenever you fix your screen ratio you have automatically relegated the "other" screen ratio to a much smaller size. I would much rather get a roughly 2.0 to 1 screen and then put both 2.35 and 1.78 material inside of that screen so they both have the same viewable image area.

If you experiment with a projector on a large wall and vary the image size of 1.78 and 2.35 content for long enough you begin to realize that both the height and width are important and that one should not be assigned priority over the other. I think it is more appropriate to keep the image area constant between the various ratios.

I have seen it stated after choosing to utilize CIH that their 2.35 ratio films are now seen "as the director intended". I think this comment is somewhat misleading. What the director actually intended was to display the movie in a certain format with a certain framing strategy. The size of 2.35 to 1.78 has nothing to do with this artistic choice. As long as that is understood, then I think it is fine that people choose to have their 2.35 content be larger than their 1.78 content if they have to make a choice. That is what I would do if I had to make a compromise.

I have also seen it stated after choosing to utilize CIH that their 2.35 ratio films are now much more cinematic and jaw dropping than ever before. Then they go on to say that their 1.78 films are still very "pleasing". Pleasing? Personally, I did not spend many thousands of dollars to have a "pleasing" experience while watching Avatar or Hellboy or Resident Evil or Band of Brothers or hundreds of other 16:9 films. I want nothing less than to be blown away by what I am seeing. I want a completely enveloping experience no matter the format.

Everyone makes a compromise. After the compromise is made it is difficult to admit that you made one.

I feel that CIA is the way to go and presents fewer compromises.

So my screen will be roughly 2.0:1 ratio. When viewing 2.35 films I will mask the top and bottom with removable manual panels. When watching 1.78 films will mask the left and right sides. The screen area will remain constant.

I think the ultimate screen would be an infinitely variable screen size so you could tailor the size to the quality of the source. It would require complicated masking system or a very expensive one. I might do it at a much later date but after I finish my room I won't have the energy.

Imagine a 2.0:1 screen that is as big as your wall. You can then use ANY size 2.35 or 1.78 image and use custom masking panels to frame the image. So you are not limited in size on either format! That is an advantage worth going with in my book. Maybe not perfect but better than CIH or CIW in my opinion.
Edited by jedimastergrant - 8/12/12 at 7:48pm

Yes, I also have a ceiling height problem. It is VERY close if I want to have a 54" tall image for 16:9 content. I have the support beam near the front of the room and it complicates thing significantly.

When Archaea was over last time he pointed out that my room would look better if I just extended the soffit that will go around the support beam towards the front of the room to meet up with my false wall and screen. He is absolutely right but then that soffit would overlap with my screen by about 1 inch. I would also be worried about reflections off of the ceiling. I would have to cover it with black velvet or something but it is still worrisome.

It is easier to mask a scope screen for sure. I will have a masking system no matter which way I go. I will never see black bars. That would be unacceptable. My system will be manual removable panels. Either compression fit or rare earth magnets.

And like I said before, CIH is the compromise I would make if I needed to. I would just rather not make a compromise and have as large of an image that I want for any content.

Tedd,

Thanks for the pictures.

To take things up a notch. It would be even better to have a series of 4 masking panels for each image size you desire. That way you could have say 2 sizes of each format. Of course you have to make more panels and put them up each time.

It might be better to utilize curtain masking components for both vertical and horizontal and have an infinitely variable image size system. It is just difficult to do.

Full Sound Proofing with Ted!

The decision is made and I will be placing my order shortly. This was a tough choice bc it takes directly out of my budget for other things and since the room was already finished it means ripping out most of the existing dw. There are a few walls that are built with the studs decoupled from the foundation walls so we do not need to clip and channel them. Only need to add another layer of dw with gg between.

My plan is clips, channel, osb, dw with gg between. I will be addressing the HVAC with a soffit muffler supply and a dead vent return. I will detail that in another post. I am also doing a communicating door at the entrance and I will show some details on why that was actually an easy decision as it is related to the location of my future dead vent return.

A few days ago I ripped out the dw on the rear wall that backs to the stairwell which is of course of huge importance to decouple since as Ted informed me it is one of the few areas that is connected to your whole house!

Here is the result.

Before



After





Well, there is no going back now!

Had to look at mini vans all day yesterday (which is also coming out of the HT budget). I think I will take out my frustration on the ceiling! Pics to follow.......

Thanks Dave I at least have access to one and so I will learn how to use it.

Now that the dw is coming out I will have no problem running wiring in the walls. I was planning to run some kind of 4" ish flex duct in a few of the ceiling joists from the rear to the front of the room. I was also planning to use 12 ga cl2 rated in wall speaker cable from mono price. I placed an order last night. My front 3 speakers could have runs of up to 60 ft. Am I covered? I used a few of the resources often cited here and it indicated that 14 was sufficient so I decided to do a little overkill bc it is pretty cheap. Am I covered?

What else do I need to run up there? I was thinking about an ir repeater and maybe an hdmi cable and possibly an Ethernet cable. I don't even know what for but just wanting to ask.

Oh yeah I need to run a cable for my orbit shifter. Since the run is so long at at least 50' what do you guys recommend? Is the mono price RCA cable ok? Edit. It uses an xlr balanced connector.
Edited by jedimastergrant - 8/20/12 at 7:16am

Hey congrats on the orbit shifter! I know we talked about how you have already owned an amazing sub in the jl audio Gotham but I trust the orbit shifter demo did not disappoint! I am glad there are a few more of these subs trickling into HT's.

My plan was to use the recommended 25 ga dw furring channel (hat channel) for added flex. What did you use for yours? I have not purchased it yet either so where is a good (and cheap) source?

Archaea,

I think that is exactly what I need to do. I think the XLR balanced cables are supposed to be better for long distances. But, my Denon 4311 only has RCA outputs for the sub 1 and sub 2 to my knowledge so I need to get a shorter XLR to RCA converter for that connection.

Mono price is out of the 75 ft. Drat! They seem to have the best prices yet again. I think the more expensive cables mainly have better connectors which is useful for pro applications but in an HT I am thinking I will be fine.

They do have 50 ftin stock and it might be close if I want to move the OS to the other side of the room. I don't think I will want to do that bc the only place I can put the second sub is in the rear left corner and if I remember correctly the best configuration for subs is in opposing corners (caddy corner). Maybe with the converter extension it could work.

I will give you the advice I was given. "Bend with your knees!"

P.S. I will add to that to take the plastic off. (:oI really can't believe I did that:o)

I still remember the fun Jeff had with us at Archaea's blind sub GTG at the end when he let the dual OS's loose. The pressurization was so intense it was like being underwater and being beaten a little bit all over your body and indeed through your body. You could feel your lungs resonating! VERY intense!

Hey, it was my pleasure. I had a lot of fun doing that. I wish I had even taken a few more pics. But, here is one or two more just because they are so darn cute!





Nobody call CPS I promise it was not on! No twins were harmed during this photo shoot.

It does kind of look like the big bad Orbit Shifter is going to swallow them up though!