Different Ratio Setups

1. Correct, however you could use masking on a 16.9 screen to eliminate the black bars, so the question should really be which AR do you want to be the larger one? Seeing as you've said you mainly watch scope titles then it stands to reason to display them as large as possible.

2. Negligible.

3. It will have black bars either side of the image, so the reverse effect of a 2.35:1 film on a 16.9 screen.

4. It will work the same, the only difference is the width of the bars either side of the image. On a 16.9 screen the bars will appear the same size as the bars of a 1.85:1 film on a scope screen. The black bars either side of 4.3 content on a scope screen will be twice as wide because the image remains the same width but the scope screen is much wider. I would advise too that VHS content displayed via a projector can look very ordinary, especially if you've been watching blu-ray content before hand.

Feel free to ask for further explanation. I've made it as simple as possible but it is still a confusing subject for newcomers.
Cheers.
Edited by crazy4daisy - 1/11/13 at 10:32pm

Here is a tutorial with pictures that should help answer some of your questions.

Yes that explains it perfectly.

You really need to take the time to thoroughly read the link Josh Z has provided, and more importantly understand the information contained, otherwise you'll just go around in circles.

Most of us with CinemaScope setups enjoy different formats also, so you're not Robinson Crusoe there. The whole point of a CIH setup is to display movies how the director intended them to be viewed, that is 16.9 movies wider than 4.3 movies, and scope movies wider than 16.9 movies.

Yes a scope movie displayed on a 16.9 screen will be the same width as a 16.9 movie but will be shorter in height because it is a different ratio. The same thing occurs with 16.9 movies displayed on a traditional 4.3 tv. It's all in the link Josh Z has provided and explains it much better than what I or anyone else here can.

Cheers and good luck.

Well, not anyone else. One of us here did write it.

Hehe my bad, apologies Josh! I read that article when it first came out on Hidefdigest and loved it, but I took no notice of who wrote it, and checking the link and seeing it again during this thread and again I didn't take note of who wrote it! Sorry again.

You have read wrong information then or misunderstood some key factors.
CIH - Constant Image Height. The height remains the same no matter what ratio the film or source material is. Displaying a 16.9 image on a scope screen you will have black bars either side. The image is no smaller then if it was displayed on a 16.9 screen PROVIDED the HEIGHT remains CONSTANT. Example - if you were to buy a 16.9 screen and it was 40 inches tall, all your 16.9 shows would be 40 inches tall and would fill the entire width of the 16.9 screen. Now to keep your 16.9 shows at the same size of 40 inches tall on a scope screen, the scope screen would obviously have to be 40 inches tall also, so now your 16.9 image displays the EXACT same size as it would have on a 16.9 screen, but you have black bars either side of the image which is the extra width of the scope screen. I can't explain it any simpler, and Josh Z's article explains all this. I've no doubt you've read plenty on the subject but you seem to be struggling to actually understand what it is saying. Don't take this the wrong way, it's a complex subject and I can guarantee 99%+ of the general population would have no idea. Keep reading Josh's article, print it out and study it. Especially study the diagrams and explanations. Cheers.

130" Scope Screen

Exactly! In my case I have two MDF panels with jet-black colored velvet fabric over them which I simply lift into place and hang on the scope frame via 2 small brackets. Although only a manual system, they cost less than 100 bucks and work a treat.

Panels in place, now approx.102" 16.9 screen

Edited by crazy4daisy - 1/12/13 at 12:08am

You don't have to include curtains. That's how I choose to do it. Some people just leave the screen exposed with pillarbox bars on the sides of narrower material.

Do you do anything to cover up the letterbox bars on your 16:9 TV now? You get used to seeing the black bars. Same thing can happen in scope. Or you can put some curtains up and cover the bars.

It's not like you have to get up and do it every five minutes. The average movie is 90 minutes to 2 hours long. How many movies do you watch in a night?

The idea is not to make 16:9 smaller. It's to make 2.35:1 bigger. So, you find a screen that's the same height as whatever 16:9 screen you would normally use, then you make it wider. 16:9 material is the same size as it would be otherwise, but scope is bigger.

If all you do is zoom, yes. The letterbox bars will be projected off the top and bottom of the screen. Some black masking fabric around the screen will absorb it so you don't notice.

If you want to get rid of the bars altogether, you need an anamorphic lens, and your projector will need to be able to apply the appropriate vertical stretch.

1.85:1 is basically 16.9, so no it's not in between 16.9 and scope. The difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1 is insignificant, so not worth worrying about.

All projectors are native 16.9. They produce the same amount of pixels for scope as a 16.9 does but an "X" amount of the pixels will make up the black bars top and bottom. So if zooming, your actual scope picture will have approx. a third of the pixels missing (the missing third are the black bars zoomed off the screen), to preserve all the pixels you would need to use an anamorphic lens. These are basic explanations, someone with more expertise may explain further with more detail.

I have an anamorphic lens so I have no overspill outside the onscreen image, however if I did zoom, the entire screen wall is painted black so the black bars would be absorbed. Up to you what you do to absorb the overspill, some people aren't bothered by it, others hate it. Black material is a popular choice to absorb the black bars.

Well I'm going to go on record as recommending a 2.40:1 screen compared to 2.35:1 or 2.33:1. Maybe there's something wrong with my setup, but with my screen (49.5" x 116", so about 2.34:1) I find that I pretty much always have at least a couple of inches of picture bleeding off to each side of my screen when watching a scope movie and zooming it so that the height fills the screen completely.

So, just by getting a projector which supports vertical stretch will solve this problem ?

So, which Epson model supports Vertical stretch ?

Just curious, what those anamorphic lenses normally cost and does it work with all types of projectors and convert to 2.35:1 ?

No, vertical stretch by itself will not solve the issue. You will need to stretch the image, then use the Anamorphic lens to reshape the image to the correct [geometry] size. Doing scope on your first ever projector It is not an easy place to start. I have been doing home theater for 10 years and am just now going scope, and I find the learning curve to be steep, even knowing what all of the terms are.

The best place to start is on post #4 of this thread. Then go to the search function at the top of any thread and type in Anamorphic, or 2..35 and read, read some more, read some more, then ask to have the blanks filled in.

Everyone here wants to help, they really do, but the basics must be done first, which means study by searches first, reading a lot, then asking the questions.


Or we can just say buy an Epson 5010, 2.35 screen, and the cheapest lens out there a, Panamorph, Cinevista and your done. It will do what you want.

You'll still have to read though on how to make it work.


Oh and AV Science has a store that sells everything you need and I mentioned too.

The general rule is 'as close as possible without touching the screen surface."

That will minimize shadowing in the biggest variety of lighting/projector position situations.

Commercial masking systems vary: my Carada vertical masking system has the masks about 1/4" off the screen surface. Whereas I've seen some much more expensive Stewart masking systems in which the masking looked to be about 1 1/2" to 2" off the screen surface.

My Carada masks the top and bottom of images. I added an automated side masking panel system to my set up over top of my Carada so I have 4 way masking. I was concerned to get my side masking as close to the screen surface as possible. However, it had to clear the frame of my screen so it couldn't be as close as the Carada masking.
What I did to get the side mask edges closer to my screen surface is this: I went to Home Depot and bought a couple of long hinges - these were two metal strips about 2" wide each, 8 feet long, hinged together. I cut them to the height of the visible screen portion, so they would fit inside the area of my screen's frame. Then I had those sewn into the leading edges of my side masking. Since they were placed only within the screen area, they were not impeded by having to clear the screen frame. Then I simply pushed the angle of the leading edge piece in toward the screen surface, so now the leading edge was angled in toward the screen, making for a closer-to-screen-surface leading edge.

Ultimately I got my side masks about 2" from the screen surface (I actually would have got them a bit closer but my side masking system was installed a bit further out than I had designed).

I have no shadowing at all. It looks really clean and sharp when a movie is playing..

FWIW...
Edited by R Harkness - 4/13/13 at 9:24am

as an FYI - I have a scope screen, 99% of my watching is movies. When in 16:9 mode I still find the screen huge - the key to nirvana is to get the image height to match the 16x9 screen size you are happy with and then the scope screen will fill out the sides, meaning less compromise on both. I even watched Pinocchio last night in ol' 1.33 and found it a large and enjoyable image size (kids loved it - I find it a depressing movie).