The Official Stewart Film Screen thread. - Page 35

I now have my Stewart ST-130 G3 screen material up, combined with a Carada Masquerade masking system. (The system isn't finished as I'm adding more masking for a 4-way masking system).

Overall I'm very happy but it's been interesting.

My room isn't quite finished and I don't have full light control yet. But at the moment I'm using an old Panny AE900 projector - as I won't put my JVC RS20 into the system until it's finished and I have full light control.

Before my room reno started I was projecting on an ochre-colored wall. The image looked surprisingly good. Not the last word in detail or brightness - my Panny has over 2,000 hours on the bulb and it came from a heavy smoking environment, so it has a duller than average image at the moment.
But the black levels, while not great, didn't strike me as terrible either. Overall a fairly satisfying image. Not as bright as I'd like.

Since I was going for a large image - 125" by 61" of viewable image area, using 4 way masking and projector zoom to vary the image size - I wanted to ensure I had a bright enough image.

So I tried the much discussed Da Lite HP material. I bought a 105" diagonal 16:9 section of the HP screen material and tried it on my wall. I had the projector behind the viewing chair so it was pretty much in line with the screen, as demanded by the retroreflective HP screen. Whoa that thing was BRIGHT. Turned my almost dead Panny projector into a blazing, DLP-looking light canon! And I was amazed at the increased perception of image sharpness, detail and color detail I got with the HP screen.

But I ultimately didn't care for the image on the HP with the Panny because it looked kind of odd and unbalanced, much as my friend's older Sanyo projector looked on his HP screen. The bright areas were too bright and the dark areas were too raised in level, so any object on screen that was a light source or was reflective tended to pop out of the image, almost looking detached from the rest of the image. I know that a projector with much better black levels would have helped with this quite a bit (and I did see my RS20 on the HP screen briefly - it looked very impressive).

But what really killed it was the viewing angles. I absolutely hated the way the image lost brightness (and along with it, the perception of losing detail, shadow detail etc) as I moved out of the center sofa seat toward the sides.
One of the reasons I've always preferred plasma over LCD flat panels is the viewing angle issue. I just find there is something more natural, believable and beautiful about an image that stays steady wherever I move or sit.

So I got a hold of a similar sized piece of Carada Brilliant White material (from someone who was moving to a different screen size). I LOVED this material! It has a beautiful, unobtrusive, matte-like finish that disappears
really well when an image is projected on it. And I LOVED the wide viewing angles. In a way the image reminded me even more of the things I liked about plasma (solid image) vs the HP screen material. Black levels actually looked fairly good too.

Really the only issue was brightness. I wasn't sure it was going to be bright enough. The Panasonic looked a tad dingy on the Carada screen and didn't have that zing of incredible brightness and sharpness as the image on the HP material, but it somewhat made up for that by looking more cinematic, deeper, more solid (at least in darker scenes...again...we are talking the projector/screen combo here - many people report quite a bright image with THEIR projector on the Carada BW material).

I ordered some Stewart samples, including a large piece of the StudioTeck ST-130 material, and a board with smaller samples of the rest of the Stewart screens.

As I described earlier in this thread, I did find the ST-130 looked noticeably brighter than the Carada. I found it brought out some more visible sharpness/detail, likely due to the slightly brighter image I'm sure. But there was also a certain "something" that made objects look a bit more tactile on the Stewart material.

I had considered the Firehawk material but I didn't care for it's tendency to hot-spot when I've seen it in action (many times) and I do see the screen coating on the Firehawk.

My room renovation will leave me with a dark ceiling (covered in brown felt), dark rug, dark viewing sofa, light walls, but lots of dark velvet brown curtains to pull over most of the light walls. I wanted to get the Stewart ST-130 for it's gain, image "pop" and wide viewing angles and hope I could control room reflections enough to get a good image.

I put up the Stewart screen material a couple weeks ago. Now that I have it up and paired with the same Panasonic 720p projector I've been using in the room for a while, I'm amazed at what the ST-130 brings to the party. It strikes me as amazingly "refined" and seems to bring out clarity, color and shadow detail in abundance from the projector. I get the feeling of seeing "all there is to see" in the source (or at least as this projector can render it). So it seems to have ended up as good an in-between the Carada and HP material type of selection - a "just right" surface for me. I'm getting nice vividness to the image with the type of added sharpness and detail I saw with the HP, but without the compromises in light drop off and viewing angles. Viewing angles seem fine and I can't help re-visiting many of my DVDs and HD material to see them again on this screen.

The only issue with this combo is black levels and possibly image wash out from both my lack of full light control and the fact I don't have curtains to cover my light walls yet. I can definitely see light coming back to the screen to lower the image contrast in some scenes. And black levels pretty much suck at the moment. At the same time, many scenes actually look punchier and more dimensional, with more contrast than I've seen before. The Transformers Blu Ray has never looked so impressively contrasty and dimensional in my room.

As far as the visibility of the screen surface goes, for the most part it disappears quite well, with the best of them. Though I can still see a bit of the optical coating surface sometimes on very bright areas, it's much better than any gray screen with gain I've seen (like the Firehawk where, once I see the surface I seem to see it over lots of source material). I've yet to see a perfect screen in this regard. Even the Carada screen didn't totally "disappear," although I found it to be a very innocuous surface even when I did detect it.

At the same time, there seems to be something I sort of like about some gain on a screen. There seems to be a certain lustre or intensity added to the image that in a way makes it look a bit more solid and convincing, especially bright areas.

So, my hope is that once I have my curtains in and full light control, as well as my JVC RS20 up and running, I will feel I've chosen the right screen.

I re-visited my local AV high end store and looked at their Panasonic 3000 and the JVC RS10 playing on Firehawk screens. I did envy the Firehawk's effortless way of maintaining image contrast to be sure and briefly wondered if I made the right decision going with the ST-130. But then I noticed the screen surface jump out at me at one point. And I moved off axis from the 120" wide 2:35:1 Firehawk screen the light drop off on the side furthest from me was very evident. I think that would dig at me too much and I thought "Yep, I made the right decision with the ST-130." (That said I still think the Firehawk screen is a marvel: many of the very best projected images I've seen have been on the Firehawk screen in various set ups).

So far it seems very promising.

Would the original FireHawk work well with today's 1080p projectors? Obviously the first choice would be the Firehawk G3 but will my 5 year old Firehawk screen hold up nicely if I upgrade my projector?

I would be supprised if you even could see a difference.

The optical coating for the G3 materials is much finer and optimized for the finer detail of 1080p content.

Screen and Schneider lens should be installed tomorrow.Been waiting a long time for this.

Hi There Everybody,

I have a 10 ft wide x 13 ft length x 10 ft height hometheatre room. The Ceiling is dark blue in color, the 13 ft walls are a red rust color and the floor is a very dark brown colour. One 10 ft wall has a Da-Lite Matte white screen, and the opposite 10 ft wall has the projector hanging from the ceiling with seating below it, making my viewing distance 12 ft. both these walls are a very dark blue in color. i do not have any windows and lights can be turned off.

the projector i am currently using is the NEC HT1100 which throws a picture that is bright enough for me, from a distance of 12 ft from the Matte white Da-Lite Screen. Screen width is 67".

I want to buy an 80" wide 16:9 screen. I don't think i need a grey screen because of the way i can control the light in my room and also 'cause i do not have light colored furniture in my room. the relatvely lightest colour being the red rust color walls on the sides which actually are not that light neither are they really dark.

Please tell me which screen (ie. the studiotek 100 G3 or 130 G3) will be best for someone like me who watches a lot of movies (2-3 hours everyday) and like to see a quality picture with deep blacks fine detail and good colours but not at the cost of being strained by the picture being too bright. I wanted to buy the Studiotek 100 but was a liitle confused after i read an article by projectorcentral.com on the Studiotek 100.

Also please comment on how the Da-Lite JKP affinity Screen (which is apparently a very light grey) will perform in my room as compared to the stewart screens.

PS. I will be upgrading to a 1080p LED projector in the near future.

Thank you for listening

What would a five year old stewart deluxe luxus firehawk 16x9 92" screen be worth? I am going to sell mine and go a littel bigger. Thanks

There's an article in the September issue of Widescreen Review which compares the JKP Affinity with the StudioTek 100.

also look at:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/stew...diotek_100.htm

As someone very sensitive to screen surfaces and screen artifacts, I can't help but be curious about the new Stewart Studiotek 100. (I have the Studiotek 130 and it is superb, although I can detect the optical coating when viewing movie content).

The Studiotek 100 always seems to come with stern warnings about using it in anything but the strictest bat cave conditions. Yet it's pretty much a unity gain screen, and people have been using unity gain screens in many different home theaters without pulling their hair out that the image is washing out.

So I'm curious: Has anyone actually had experience with the new Studiotek screen? If so does it really only look excellent in a velvet-lined bat cave? Any comparisons to other similar screens?

I have a fully light controlled room with dark carpet, dark brown felt ceiling, and chocolate velvet curtains that can cover the vast majority of the walls in the room.
Is there any reason to expect the Studiotek 100 to under-perform the Studiotek 130 in such a scenario?

I'm also a intrigued, but a bit dubious, about the claims, for instance from Widescreen review, that the Studiotek 100 can offer "increased contrast" and resolution when used properly. I'm not sure why it would actually offer increased contrast in real-world use over, say the ST-130. If anything one might think with it's wide light dispersion it might be more challenging to realise increased contrast on the ST-100.

Thoughts?

Rich,

With respect to your question about "increased contrast", I think the reviewer was referring to the gray tint of the Affinity making for more contrast...but apparently at the expense of uniformity. As for the suitability of StudioTek 100 for your situation, it sounds like your room is suitably muted to appreciate the benefits when the lights are turned off....as long as your projector is in the upper percentiles of brightness/contrast capability.

I'm talking about quotes like this from Widescreen Review, which in the review of the Studiotek 100 said:

"This is a reference quality screen that exhibits better contrast, more detail, and far better uniformity over the entire image area than any other
screen material the company has to offer. "

The "better contrast" is puzzling and I'm curious why the reviewer would claim such a thing and/or how it would have been explained...and verified.

So you're reading "better" to mean "increased"?

The potential problem with the StudioTek 100 doesn't really reside in its unity gain (although related); but, rather in the fact it is a lambertian diffusor. A full lambertian diffusor (unity gain) is a requirement for reference screen materials and the StudioTek100 is a great screen!

Because of its lambertian characteristics, you will have more light splash onto side walls, floors and ceilings coupled with no ambient light rejection. In anything other than the proverbial "bat cave", you could have issues with reflected light off room surfaces affecting picture quality.

Of course.

Does that surprise you, for some reason?

1. Aren't all unity gain screens (at least those without optical coatings to add gain) approaching lambertian performance? Or did Stewart have to do something special with their unity gain screen to increase diffusion?
If so, I'd be curious at how much wider, or more uniform, the Studiotek is vs an average white unity gain screen.

2. Comparing the Studiotek 130 to the Studiotek 100: I get that the 100 would reflect more light to the sides and visa versa, compared to the 130.
At the same time it seems to me the gain is lower than the Studiotek, so that should in some way help in room contrast a bit. Wouldn't it?
(For the same reasons a gray screen helps, although not to the same degree of course).

As well, wouldn't the advantage of the Studiotek be very mild in terms of directivity and cross-light reflections? With it's higher gain, wouldn't the 130 actually be a bit more prone to reflections coming at it from it's pretty wide angle of reflectivity?

I can certainly see why the ST 100 would perform in a more problematic manner vs a number of screens made to help combat room interactions (e.g. gray screens, gray screens with gain, highly directional screens with gain etc). What I can't quite get, yet, is why the ST 130 would perform any better in an imperfect room (aside from simply offering a bit of gain for dimmer projectors).

How would a videomatte 200 8' scope screen look with a Alan tweaked ( higher brightness ) ruby and a prismasonic anamorphic lens? I'm running a wilsonart laminate screen currently and would like to up my gain a bit. Also, will it hot spot?

The studiotek 100 probably doesn't have any significantly wider diffusion than a typical 1.0 matte white screen but its surface is extremely smooth and shows more detail. Most matte white screens have some texture when viewed very close.

The 130 is less prone to cross reflections than the 100. Reflections or light coming from outside the viewing cone will be 'rejected' or greatly reduced compared to reflections or light coming from the viewing cone. Since the 100 has a wider viewing cone it is much more susceptible to reflections. It is a great material but as Dennis said it was designed for the true bat cave. And by bat cave I mean black velvet type walls, ceiling, floors ,etc., not just painted dark. Only in this environment will someone really benefit from the 100 otherwise the reflections would hurt its contrast.

Bob

Perhaps the reviewer is referring to 'better' black field uniformity in conjunction with the white field uniformity...

Two questions for the experts:

I'm planning to buy a 100 16x9 Luxus Model A Electriscreen that will be wall mounted. I want the screen to drop down in front of a (also) wall-mounted super slim UN55B8000 Samsung TV (which should be 1.5 from the wall with the proprietary Samsung mount). How far will the screen be off the wall using the included wall brackets? I was told that I will probably need some 2x4 wood to get additional clearance (even with the reduced depth of the Samsung) but wanted to get you guys' opinions.

The second question is how difficult is it to mount this screen? I saw a post about the older model (the classic luxus A) but not specifically about the one I'm considering (smaller housing). Do the brackets move or are they fixed in the housing? Any feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you.

I have the same setup that you are proposing. I have a Luxus A 100" wall mounted screen that goes over an older large in wall mounted CRT. I needed 3 inches of clearance to clear the CRT. I built a spacer that ended up being 105" long by 3" wide and 5.5" high out of laminated 2x4's. I used kiln dried 2x4's and covered the final assembly with Ash veneer. The center part of the spacer is only 3.5" high giving me a 2" cavity where I buried the wiring. I also installed a 180 LED super bright color light bar made by Cyron in the cavity shinning up to the ceiling for a decorative backlight. I have the backlight controlled by x10. The 2x4's are flush bolted to the studs in the wall and the screen is then hung onto the front of the 2x4 assembly. It looks nice and provides an excellent solution to my problem. No wiring or lighting is externally visible.

Does anyone plan on answering my question or do I have to just buy the screen and then see for myself? Here's a picture of my image on the wilsonart screen.

Thanks Marswill for the very useful reply. I have a few follow-up questions if you don't mind. Are the brackets on the Luxus A floating or are they fixed to the end of the case? Also when the screen is fully retracted, how far is the screen from the back of the case (including the batten)? I'm trying to calculate the optimal depth for the spacer for my setup. How did you create the 3 inch spacer out of the 2x4? Nailing them together and shaving a one inch layer? I'm also assuming you went with a 5.5 height to match the height of the Luxus case? Finally, how is you wiring done, did you have it hardwired or did you use one of the remote options? I'm trying to figure out whether I should have an AC outlet high up near the case or if this is a bad idea. Thanks a lot in advance for the help.

Hi KB1,
The brackets on the Luxus A are fixed onto the back of the case and have keyhole slots that slip over the mounting screws (one on each end). The screen is a little over 3¾ from the back of the batten to the wall in my installation.

A finished 2x4 is actually 1.5x3.5 in size so gluing two of these together gave me my main support beam of 3x3.5x105. I then added a 3x0.5x12 plywood spacer to each end and put a 3x1.5x12 piece made from trimmed 2x4 on top of that thereby making the ends of the beam a total of 3x5.5 for the first 12. This gave me the cavity to hide things. Everything was glued and screwed and covered with Ash veneer. I counter-bored two holes through the main beam through which I bolted the beam to the studs in the wall. Of course I added two #12 stainless steel screws in the 12 sections from which to hang the screen.

I added a 115VAC outlet in the wall such that it resided in the 2 cavity of the beam using a small metal power strip that supported a romex cable clamp so that the wiring was all buried in the wall and hidden from view. The screen was ordered with the 12V trigger option. The trigger cable was run from the cavity through the wall to an outlet near the AV Receiver (Denon 4306) which controls the screen.

By the way, the reason I did things this way is that my theater room has a vaulted ceiling which prevented me from using a ceiling mount installation.

Thanks again Marswill! Very useful info indeed. I think I'll do something very similar as my setup does not allow for a ceiling installation (basement with drop down ceiling). Are the eyebolts levelled with the top of the case or slightly higher? I'm trying to also figure out the distance from the mount to the floor.

Not sure what you mean by eyebolts. The only eyebolts that I'm aware of are for a suspended ceiling mount, i.e., the screen would be supported by cables or chains. That doesn't apply in my installation. If you mean the mounting brackets then they are on the back of the screen case with the top of the brackets flush with the top of the case. The brackets are also mounted flush with the back of the case and inboard from the ends of the case. You can learn a lot by reading the Luxus manual "Luxus A/SR-1 Electriscreen: Owner's Manual". This should be available on the Stewart Film Screen web site. If you can't find a copy you can PM me and I'll send it to you.

Yes, sorry, I had meant the mounting brackets. I actually have looked at the manual but could not tell from the picture whether the brackets were flush with the top of the case. Your posts answered my questions perfectly, thanks again.

The 130 is less prone to cross reflections than the 100. Reflections or light coming from outside the viewing cone will be 'rejected' or greatly reduced compared to reflections or light coming from the viewing cone. Since the 100 has a wider viewing cone it is much more susceptible to reflections. It is a great material but as Dennis said it was designed for the true bat cave. And by bat cave I mean black velvet type walls, ceiling, floors ,etc., not just painted dark. Only in this environment will someone really benefit from the 100 otherwise the reflections would hurt its contrast.

Bob[/quote]

Bingo!!!

hello all,

i currently have a 120" 16x9 StudioTek 130 G3 w/ Microperf X2, with a throw and viewing distance of 14 feet using the Sony VPL-VW60 and total light control.

a friend wants to replicate my video performance but wants to go rear projection using the Sony VPL-HW15 and limited ambient light in a mutli purpose room.

which screen material would be best in this application? Aeroview, Lumiflex, or Flimscreen? Also, can you get the Luxus Deluxe frame for rear projection, or is there a different frame for rear projection?

thx in advance for your opinions.

Probably good to ask Jason Turk here or call Stewart sales for your options. We just introduced CrystalView 60 and the StarGlas RP installs look amazing.