Official Sony VPL-HW50ES Owners Thread - Page 7

Originally Posted by mark haflich 

Or get rid of that HP and buy a reference quality screen. The only reason for going to a HP is the need for screen gain because of lumens available and screen size. You really should see how the picture quality improves with a screen material like JKP Affinity 1.1 or Snowmatt 100. I am not joking around here. The ideal screen should disappear. That never happens with an HP. Never.

Originally Posted by chomperoni 

Unfortunately I don't own a lumagen unit and are disappointed that the HW50 does not allow for this out of the box. I guess I am stuck looking at the VPL-VW95ES which has a motorized lens or going with another manufacturer.

Originally Posted by coderguy 

I was being partly sarcastic, you're preaching to the choir.
I had a projector that couldn't go below 900 lumens on a 106" screen getting about 1.3 gain, but there is a point where you can have too many lumens.
I lived through it but it did hurt my eyes the first 500 hours, I should have bought an ND filter but I never bothered.

Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 

I have told people for years, the cheapest improvement they can do for their image is to paint the room black. You would be surprised at how much, that would even improve a lower contrast projector. My room is not much to look at with the lights on, since I have black floor, walls and ceiling, but turn the lights off and it is a different story.

Originally Posted by Toe 

I cant even imagine downgrading to a 1.0 screen with my setup. A different projector might change my mind, but the JVC/HP combo is a stunner in my HT that a 1.0 screen flat out could not hang with. We just got done watching Madagascar 3 which is one of the finest and most detailed blus to date and my jaw was on the floor. Max throw, iris clamped all the way down to -15 (which I could NEVER do with a 1.0 screen and be happy with brightness wise, lol) so I was maxing out contrast on my 45, yet brightness was still fantastic due to the HP gain. Throw in the Darbee doing its thing and I kept thinking....."why am I even on the 4810 preorder list"?
Having said all that, the HP is only a great screen in the right setup, just like any other screen. There is no one size fits all "reference" screen since every setup/room/situation is different.

Originally Posted by soupdragon 

That may have been my post on avforums perhaps?

Using coderguys excellent calculator, I'll have no issues lighting it up in 2d and for 3d, I'll get somewhere around 8-10fl for 3D depending on my screen material as I've 1.0 and 1.1 samples coming. But, it's going to have 4 way masking so it will become the most flexible and adjustable I've had to date so I can trim back to smaller screen size for that if I feel the need.
As had already been mentioned, with 2d and 3d brightness variance, getting the perfect balance between screen size and gain is difficult so I've decided to go my way as I like the idea of wide viewing angles and my room lends itself towards low gain due to batcave environment.

Originally Posted by henrich3 

Several years ago I evaluated the JKP Affinity, HP 2.8, and HP 2.4 against my then current matte white. I ended up upgrading to the HP 2.4 based on not only the gain but also the lack on artifacts. The old 2.8 formulation had a bit of a paisley sheen, but the 2.4 has no sheen, no sparklies, no grain, no artifacts of any sort that I can see. Just a nice, bright image that'll make a matte white or Affinity look drab in comparison. Granted, the HP is not as linear as a matte white (red is slightly emphasized), but a calibration resolves that issue. I'm curious to understand why you believe the HP is not a good choice for someone buying an HW50 (<- On topic!).

Originally Posted by mark haflich 

The HP needs the right placement of the projector with respect to the viewer vertically in order to deliver its stated gain. That's about it.
Going to a 1.0 is not a DOWNGRADE. And the HP is Never a Great screen It has great gain. Its white .Its a good screen but you know what? Most screens are good screens! There are some bad screens with the bad coming mostly from incorrect set up or application. The only thing reference quality about HP is its gain and then it will raise your reference black level by the same gain factor. No professional reviewer would use it as a reference screen. A studeotech 100 is a reference. A HP is measured against that. Picture quality is determined on a reference screen. If brightness is not sufficient, the screen size is lowered for the evaluation.
To many, brightness is all that counts. It swamps everything else. Panting, they exclaim the screen is great. The only thing they see is the brightness. Minir less than greats don't matter to them. They are simply not aware of a screens negatives. Pant, pant. Its bright.
I ask them all "Does the screen disappear?" Do you think you are looking out on a scene?
Toe. I could never ever imagine downgrading to a screen where I would be constantly aware of the screen unless I had no choice because the picture would be too dim. Unless you have seen what I am talking about with respect to realism with a 4HD picture (your coming 4810) you simply are operating in the dark.
To all. Toe, Zombie and I are friends and we are having a friendly argument. The HP isn't bad but it isn't great and it isn't reference except as to gain. But its good with respect to many characteristics. But good isn't reference. Great is.

Originally Posted by SOWK 

So what everyone is saying ultimately is... If "you" have enough brightness with a 1.0 gain, stay with that, if not get a Higher Gain Screen...

Originally Posted by mark haflich 

One can like ft lamberts way above the standards just as one can prefer speakers that are louder than better speakers that won't play as loud.Those that say the HP does close to everthing right are simply blinded by the light. Let me hear an amen brother.

Originally Posted by Kelvin1965S 

You could use the manual control of the iris, but this would mean you'd lose the dynamic iris control I think? Unless you can go into the service menu and limit the opening of the iris maximum position. If you do try an ND2 filter, be aware that it's best to use coated glass ones such as the Hoya HMC type as cheap plastic ones will work as a proof of the idea, but cause major ANSI contrast loss due to reflections back into the projector.
Your other choice of course is a grey/lower gain screen if it's a smaller size (I'm guessing from 3 metres it can't be too big?).
It's a shame they don't fit a second manual iris in front of the lamp (like the dearer models of JVCs) then you could control the peak brightness and open it as the lamp ages.

Originally Posted by d.j. 

A funny little thing about brightness.
I had the 92" ST130 ( gain about 1.1 because off microperf ) screen with my old Marquee 8000 ( a CRT projector ....you know !? ) and I belive I was looking at about 1-3 Ft L and did find it okay ( I have a "true" batcave ) - and when I had the 1000ES home for test - I had about 40 -50 Ft L on the same screen - yes it was bright ........did I find it too bright ? hell NO , it was very beautyful and extreme addictive
I think Mark has found a perfect solution - a superb 2D screen ( Snomatte 100 ) with a projector with loots off light calibrated and then for the 3D - down come the HP hero and save the (day) light
For my own part, I will go for the CP2 screen ( and a HP screen for the 3D ) and sadly downgrade the picture ( and windows effect ) a little, because I need a AT screen in my setup and find the CP2 ( 0.95 gain) to be the best compromise ( the famous and very fine En4K has to low a gain for my taste/ size etc. .....begining to like it bright )
JustMike, are you still happy with yours ?
dj
BTW. My ST130 never "disappeared" 100%, because off the microperf and a little shiny effect in big white areas

Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 

I have told people for years, the cheapest improvement they can do for their image is to paint the room black. You would be surprised at how much, that would even improve a lower contrast projector. My room is not much to look at with the lights on, since I have black floor, walls and ceiling, but turn the lights off and it is a different story.