or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 217

post #6481 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.j. View Post

Wooohuuuuuu tongue.gif


Btw. Z, would you like me to try anything in comparing a 1000 versus a 1100 ? smile.gif


See if you can see the big difference som people are reporting...smile.gif
post #6482 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post

Is that a 2.35:1 133" HP screen or a 16x9? Also, what is your throw distance for the W500? How come only a 1.8 gain? Are you off axis?
Thanks

I don't think you can set up an HP screen to get 2.4 gain and not have the projector blocking part of the image, so it will always be less than max advertised gain. The more vertical distance from lens to eye, the lower the gain.
Reply
Reply
post #6483 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

See if you can see the big difference som people are reporting...smile.gif


The only difference for now I can see, is the RC behave a Little different ( less agressive, at / or close to minimum on resolution adjusting )


dj
post #6484 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

See if you can see the big difference som people are reporting...smile.gif

Now isn't that a loaded question. The difference if there is any would have to be very small. The difference between an upgraded VW1000ES and a 1100 is going to be zero, I predict. Did not step out on a limb there did I. . smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #6485 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post

Is that a 2.35:1 133" HP screen or a 16x9? Also, what is your throw distance for the W500? How come only a 1.8 gain? Are you off axis?
Thanks

Hey, it's a 16x9 screen. My throw distance is about 14 feet, and my gain is 1.8 because it is mounted a couple of feet above my head.
post #6486 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.j. View Post


Holy crapola Batman! Who's your plastic surgeon? He did an excellent job. Double D's? tongue.gif
post #6487 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsteak View Post

Excuse my newbie-ness and correct me if I'm wrong, but since the Sony has a brighter image, I should be able to get a nice 2.35 image without having to run in high lamp mode, which would improve the black levels and giving me a little better lamp life. I would be viewing movies in a pitch black room. For sports, I should be able to really get a bright image using the native resolution while watching with some ambient light.

I've seen the Sony, but not in an ideal environment, lots of light, but the picture was still great.


I use vw600es on a 145" diagonal 2.35 AT screen that has a .98 gain on low lamp and don't feel the need to put it on high. Projector is mounted at 16' away and I sit around 13.5' from screen. Room is completely dark. Everything is covered with black velvet from screen to sitting area to absorb any reflective light. I"m very happy with the brightness.
post #6488 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by SherazNJ View Post

I use vw600es on a 145" diagonal 2.35 AT screen that has a .98 gain on low lamp and don't feel the need to put it on high. Projector is mounted at 16' away and I sit around 13.5' from screen. Room is completely dark. Everything is covered with black velvet from screen to sitting area to absorb any reflective light. I"m very happy with the brightness.

I bet that looks amazing
post #6489 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

I don't think you can set up an HP screen to get 2.4 gain and not have the projector blocking part of the image, so it will always be less than max advertised gain. The more vertical distance from lens to eye, the lower the gain.

I'm sure this is true. I have my 1000 on a stand about 3-4 ft behind me, shooting to just barely clear my head (when I'm in half-reclining position, as usual!).

BTW, what's the simplest way to measure gain? It's easy to measure the lumens from the pj by standing at the screen and pointing a simple light meter toward the pj. Does one need to use ChromaPure, etc., to measure the ftL coming off the screen?
post #6490 of 8058
Everyone seems to be so hung up on the HP's gain and whether or not the screen itself negatively impacts perceived contrast. I can only speak for the older HP (2.8 gain) screen, which I have owned and lived with for the past 12 years, and my thoughts are as follows:

1) If you place the projector on a shelf behind you and just above seated head height, then this configuration will preserve all or close to all of the screen's gain.

2) If you ceiling mount the projector with a mount that allows you to lower to projector to close to seated head height then it works as per the above.

3) If you table mount the projector in front of you and raise it just enough so that you can easily see over it and the screen isn't blocked from view then it will still retain all or most of its gain.

In the event you lose some gain chances are it is still brighter than most other screens.

As far as contrast is concerned -- I have used several other screens over the years from grey screens with low gain to high gain and a 1.3 gain white screen. I have always felt that the perceived contrast I obtained from the HP trumped all the others.

Whether or not you love or hate the HP there's little doubt it is one of the only and best solutions for those looking for something more than a muted 3D image.
post #6491 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post.....while JVCs are fantastic I have a hard time believing that comparison as owners of the 1000ES, many of whom have owned JVCs in the past all say the same thing; the 1000ES is in another league.

Well at twice the price it should be :)

post #6492 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

I bet that looks amazing
Yes it does smile.gif To add more flavor, I recently built a 12" stage and raised my seating 12". This places eye level slightly higher from center point of screen vertically. Raising this way gave much better experience in scenes with camera movement. Any scene with camera angled from top, you feel like you are looking at it from top. Any scene with camera moving around, you feel like you are moving around. It was a small change to build that stage but brought a very positive result. I'd highly recommend it.
post #6493 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.j. View Post

? ( please explain it like closer, I did not understand it redface.gif )

Black level is brightness divided by contrast ratio; you can do the arithmetec to calculate the black level for each pj
post #6494 of 8058
Quote:
BTW, what's the simplest way to measure gain? It's easy to measure the lumens from the pj by standing at the screen and pointing a simple light meter toward the pj.

Right, but obviously that won't work for taking measurements off of the screen...smile.gif And once you put some distance between the screen and the meter, then the Inverse Square Law of Light kicks in and will mess up measurements taken directly from the light source versus those taken off of the screen.

I *think* that the easiest way to determine screen gain on something like a High Power would be to own a second reference screen of known gain of 1.0. I would put the meter directly in my line of sight from my seating position, but much closer to the screen in order to put the meter into a better range - meter facing screen. Take readings of a 100% white field with the High Power and then compare the readings with the High Power replaced by the reference 1.0 screen in order to attain a screen gain number.

I should have done this a long time ago when I used to own a bunch of screens, but now all of the others are gone. Back then, my first experiment involved a High Power pulldown in front (by about an inch) of a 1.0 gain matte screen. I set them up so that it was basically a makeshift half and half screen. The HP was so much brighter than the matte screen that I found no reason to measure the actual gain. The difference was overwhelming - once I saw how much brighter the HP was, I was hooked. I then compared the HP to all of the other screens I owned, including a Studiotek 130, and ALL of them looked extremely dim compared to the HP.

So what is the actual gain - don't know, and don't really care. I just know that it kicks any other screen's butt for my personal tastes and usage...and yes, I also have one of the older 2.8 gain screens...biggrin.gif
post #6495 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Right, but obviously that won't work for taking measurements off of the screen...smile.gif And once you put some distance between the screen and the meter, then the Inverse Square Law of Light kicks in and will mess up measurements taken directly from the light source versus those taken off of the screen.

I *think* that the easiest way to determine screen gain on something like a High Power would be to own a second reference screen of known gain of 1.0. I would put the meter directly in my line of sight from my seating position, but much closer to the screen in order to put the meter into a better range - meter facing screen. Take readings of a 100% white field with the High Power and then compare the readings with the High Power replaced by the reference 1.0 screen in order to attain a screen gain number.

I should have done this a long time ago when I used to own a bunch of screens, but now all of the others are gone. Back then, my first experiment involved a High Power pulldown in front (by about an inch) of a 1.0 gain matte screen. I set them up so that it was basically a makeshift half and half screen. The HP was so much brighter than the matte screen that I found no reason to measure the actual gain. The difference was overwhelming - once I saw how much brighter the HP was, I was hooked. I then compared the HP to all of the other screens I owned, including a Studiotek 130, and ALL of them looked extremely dim compared to the HP.

So what is the actual gain - don't know, and don't really care. I just know that it kicks any other screen's butt for my personal tastes and usage...and yes, I also have one of the older 2.8 gain screens...biggrin.gif

Thanks, Bob. I agree that it's probably not worth worrying about. I had a 2.8 HP but wanted a larger screen, and by then the new 2.4 was the product. I like it very much. Similar properties to the 2.8 version, but a slightly wider viewing cone. But yes, I'm also hooked on the HP!
post #6496 of 8058
Thread Starter 
this thread is ground central station for the HP fanatics. cool.gif

I think I have the largest cinema contour with the 2.8HP material. They only listed 133" as a maximum size without a seam. This actually wasn't true, they could go bigger if you custom ordered it. A nice VP @ Dalite helped me out at the time. Then a short time later, they stopped selling the 2.8 material. The reason I was given was the cost of the materials to keep producing the 2.8 at it's current price.

it's one the best screens for 3D. nice and bright with most of the projectors I have here.I just cleaned it recently, it looks brand new.
post #6497 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

this thread is ground central station for the HP fanatics. cool.gif

I think I have the largest cinema contour with the 2.8HP material. They only listed 133" as a maximum size without a seam. This actually wasn't true, they could go bigger if you custom ordered it. A nice VP @ Dalite helped me out at the time. Then a short time later, they stopped selling the 2.8 material. The reason I was given was the cost of the materials to keep producing the 2.8 at it's current price.

it's one the best screens for 3D. nice and bright with most of the projectors I have here.I just cleaned it recently, it looks brand new.

We're a Band of Brothers.
post #6498 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

this thread is ground central station for the HP fanatics. cool.gif

I think I have the largest cinema contour with the 2.8HP material. They only listed 133" as a maximum size without a seam. This actually wasn't true, they could go bigger if you custom ordered it. A nice VP @ Dalite helped me out at the time. Then a short time later, they stopped selling the 2.8 material. The reason I was given was the cost of the materials to keep producing the 2.8 at it's current price.

it's one the best screens for 3D. nice and bright with most of the projectors I have here.I just cleaned it recently, it looks brand new.


How exactly did you clean it? I am terrified to touch my screen as I have ruined screens before doing it.
post #6499 of 8058
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

How exactly did you clean it? I am terrified to touch my screen as I have ruined screens before doing it.

I read all the various methods and decided to keep it simple. I used the Scott's white 'rags' in a box you can get from depot or lowes. I folded it and kept a clean bucket of distilled water near by. I kept the rags very wet to avoid abrasion of the surface. I would do sections at a time and then a chaser with a less damp rag and then finally a hair dryer from a distance, sweeping back and forth with a medium heat to help dry the surface.

once I got a rhythm, I was able to knock it out in about an hour. I was using a 100 IRE screen in high lamp so I could see my results. I have photos around here, if I find them I'll show you the before / after. I had no idea it was this dirty until I washed it.
post #6500 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I read all the various methods and decided to keep it simple. I used the Scott's white 'rags' in a box you can get from depot or lowes. I folded it and kept a clean bucket of distilled water near by. I kept the rags very wet to avoid abrasion of the surface. I would do sections at a time and then a chaser with a less damp rag and then finally a hair dryer from a distance, sweeping back and forth with a medium heat to help dry the surface.

once I got a rhythm, I was able to knock it out in about an hour. I was using a 100 IRE screen in high lamp so I could see my results. I have photos around here, if I find them I'll show you the before / after. I had no idea it was this dirty until I washed it.

Thanks for the info. Would love to see those pics if you find them. I will give this a shot at some point as I'm sure mine could use cleaning as well.
post #6501 of 8058
correct me if i'm wrong, but a HP screen should also reduce the amount of light spill from the screen onto surrounding walls, ceiling, floor etc right?

i have no issues with brightness, in fact my projector can be much too bright if i open up the iris fully, but that being said, some of the reason i don't want to go brighter is because it absolutely lights up my room(which is mostly dark too) which causes more problems than it fixes.

at some point in the near future i will need a 'good' screen to replace the cheapies i've been using to get into this hobby. my plan has always been 1.0gain to get as flat and even a picture as possible. both my screens now are 'matte'(1.0gain white and 0.8gain grey) but still have way too much texture imo. kind of sad that putting pieces of white printer paper in front of the screen makes a noticeable improvement in apparent depth(totally removes the picture on screen feeling).

i've been scared away from HP screens because they seem to be more likely to have texture and hotspotting, but i'm thinking now something like 1.6 or 1.8 gain that's high end might give me the performance i want, but also help keeping my walls and ceiling dark like they should be. i mean we can add all the black velvet we want, but the best way to reduce reflections is to not shine light on them to begin with
post #6502 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

correct me if i'm wrong, but a HP screen should also reduce the amount of light spill from the screen onto surrounding walls, ceiling, floor etc right?

i have no issues with brightness, in fact my projector can be much too bright if i open up the iris fully, but that being said, some of the reason i don't want to go brighter is because it absolutely lights up my room(which is mostly dark too) which causes more problems than it fixes.

at some point in the near future i will need a 'good' screen to replace the cheapies i've been using to get into this hobby. my plan has always been 1.0gain to get as flat and even a picture as possible. both my screens now are 'matte'(1.0gain white and 0.8gain grey) but still have way too much texture imo. kind of sad that putting pieces of white printer paper in front of the screen makes a noticeable improvement in apparent depth(totally removes the picture on screen feeling).

i've been scared away from HP screens because they seem to be more likely to have texture and hotspotting, but i'm thinking now something like 1.6 or 1.8 gain that's high end might give me the performance i want, but also help keeping my walls and ceiling dark like they should be. i mean we can add all the black velvet we want, but the best way to reduce reflections is to not shine light on them to begin with

It depends on how close your walls and ceiling are to the screen. A 1.0 gain screen scatters a wider light path, but being 1.0 gain it reflects less light back. A 2.8 gain HP screen has a narrower viewing cone, but reflects a greater amount of light.
Reply
Reply
post #6503 of 8058
Here's a problem I ran into with one of my screens. Where I live this only applies to the summer months -- if small flying insects get into your home theatre room they will probably land on your screen since they're attracted to light. If they remain on your screen and you retract it or roll it up then the insect gets rolled up with the screen and gets squeezed against the material. Now you have a problem. This mark on your screen will show up (especially on a retro-reflective screen like the HP) and if you try and remove it you may make matters worse. Always examine your screen before retracting it and remove any insects etc. or just leave the screen down.
post #6504 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

Here's a problem I ran into with one of my screens. Where I live this only applies to the summer months -- if small flying insects get into your home theatre room they will probably land on your screen since they're attracted to light. If they remain on your screen and you retract it or roll it up then the insect gets rolled up with the screen and gets squeezed against the material. Now you have a problem. This mark on your screen will show up (especially on a retro-reflective screen like the HP) and if you try and remove it you may make matters worse. Always examine your screen before retracting it and remove any insects etc. or just leave the screen down.

Yeah same problem but not with roll up, on 2.8 material screen. But smudges caused by insects or trying to remove insects. Then the cleanup in that spot leaves bright marks. Finally about a year ago I did a thread in screen section and got help on how to clean. Denatured alcohol if I recall. But not the easiest of projects and while it is drying it looks like you have screwed it up worse. Finally I got the right pass to where it is much better uniformity on bright white screen again, but if I look carefully after eyes adjust I can still see faint areas of non uniformity from the process. Gave myself a B+.
post #6505 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

correct me if i'm wrong, but a HP screen should also reduce the amount of light spill from the screen onto surrounding walls, ceiling, floor etc right?

You are correct. The retro-reflective HP focuses the reflected light back toward its source (the projector, which ideally is not far off line from where your eyes are), with less going to the side walls and ceiling. There still is some, of course, so having dark side walls and ceiling is still desirable.
post #6506 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

i've been scared away from HP screens because they seem to be more likely to have texture and hotspotting

Not sure, but I think that's only been an issue with the HCHP, not the HP2.4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

Where I live this only applies to the summer months -- if small flying insects get into your home theatre room they will probably land on your screen since they're attracted to light. If they remain on your screen and you retract it or roll it up then the insect gets rolled up with the screen and gets squeezed against the material. Now you have a problem. This mark on your screen will show up (especially on a retro-reflective screen like the HP) and if you try and remove it you may make matters worse.

I've had that happen several times with my 2.8, and I've always been able to clean it by patiently rubbing it with a moistened soft cloth.

Yes, scary the first time because it looks like it's ruined until it dries, which takes awhile.

Might be fine but I'd use a fan, not a hair dryer.
post #6507 of 8058
Off topic. You may want to skip this.

It's remarkable how much dust accumulates on my HP screen in just a month. I regularly use a feather duster to clean it. If I neglect it for a couple/three months, I don't notice how dirty it's become until I dust it. Then it looks like new, and the gain and clarity shoot up significantly.

Denatured alcohol is the cleaning agent recommended by DaLite for the HP 2.8. I've used it several times to clean mine. When I'm finished, I use a soft, dry cloth to help get rid of the dark, wet look (which seems to stay a LONG time if you just let it air dry). I once squashed a spider on mine and the stain just didn't want to come off. I used a tiny amount of Soft Scrub (I know, crazy eek.gif ) and rubbed it very gently. It took time and patience, but I got it clean eventually without damaging the surface. I'm sure DaLite would frown (or scream) about that, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Still, it says something about how tough the material is (at least the 2.8 HP - don't know anything about the 2.4).

When I was trying to decide which screen material to go with several years ago, DaLite sent me a 6" square sample of the HP 2.8. I put it up against my existing first gen Stewart Firehawk 109" screen, alongside a SilverStar sample sent to me by Vutec. What struck me most about the HP fabric compared to the Firehawk and SS (aside from the brightness) was the relative "transparency." That is, it let me see the image without the nasty sheens, sparkles and non-uniformities of the others. When I finished testing the samples (more complicated than it sounds because of mixing angular reflective and retro-reflective samples and having to move around the room to discover the relative merits from different seating positions), I set about the task of destroying the HP sample. I wanted to see how tough it was. It took considerable effort to get it to fail. I really had to abuse it. It's better to find out before you buy it if a screen fabric is as fragile as toilet paper. smile.gif When it did fail, it was flawed in a way I never could have lived with, but I also learned how hard it would probably be to wreck it.
post #6508 of 8058
I found out just how hard a screen is to clean properly when the teeniest bug landed on my Stewart ST130 screen a few months ago. Trying to whisk it off the screen, it simply smushed leaving a tiny dark spot. I read cleaning instructions carefully for the screen, followed them, and still ended up with a larger dark smudge on the screen that never came off. My first visible smudge! Ugh! Seems to have gotten a bit better over time.
post #6509 of 8058

Note to self, do not attempt to remove bugs from the screen. Wait until they land on the wall and then crush. 

post #6510 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

It depends on how close your walls and ceiling are to the screen. A 1.0 gain screen scatters a wider light path, but being 1.0 gain it reflects less light back. A 2.8 gain HP screen has a narrower viewing cone, but reflects a greater amount of light.
To clarify, the average amount of light they reflect is likely about the same, as long as the 1.0 gain screen isn't a gray screen with a high gain layer (like the Grayhawk). The HP will reflect more toward the back walls than a standard 1.0 gain screen, but side walls, ceiling, and floor are likely in positions that are close to about 0.6 gain for the High Power, at least until you get more toward the back of the room where the angles are close and so gain higher than the ~0.6 gain the HP has for larger angles (I think around 40 degrees it is close to that and drops off a little from there).

As far as the perception of lighting the room up, I'm not sure that 1.0 or 0.6 for how much light the side walls get would make that much perceptible difference by itself, but if a person is sitting in a high gain spot the higher gain from the HP screen to them should reduce the relative light level of the side walls compared to the image from the screen also.

--Darin
Edited by darinp2 - 2/7/14 at 11:52am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014