Originally Posted by slartibartfasst
I'm new on this block, but I would suggest that if you have ANY regard for your wallet - don't see the BlendZilla. You know how it is, you get a HT idea in your head and the next minute you're massaging the finances to make room for the next "tweak." You're going to end up like Rip Van Winkle, wandering around Chicago with images of the BlendZilla playing on a loop in your head.
Seriously, though, when you take the Zilla for a spin, do try a 2.35 blend, for all of the reasons that Nick has stated. I went with a 120" wide 1.78 screen, because it fit my overall space, but if you're dedicating a room as an HT there is no reason not to go 2.35. There are some compelling bandwidth reasons, as well.
So everyone's running their G90s at 1080p60, and damn happy with the sharpness of the image, right? Because 1080p72 loses a little bit of sharpness?
For bandwidth, that's the difference between about 2200 (1920 plus a few for porches) by 1125 (1080 plus a few) by 60 or 72. So that's the difference between 148.5mhz (@60) and 178.2mhz (@72). Or put this way:
2200 x 1125 x 60 = 148.5mhz
2200 x 1125 x 72 = 178.2mhz
From what Clarence, Art and other G90 owners have indicated, the G90 starts to roll off the high frequency detail somewhere inbetween these two points in an unacceptable manner. Unacceptable might be too strong a word, though, so we'll just say that inbetween those two scan rates 3:2 judder becomes more acceptable than the high frequency roll-off / loss of sharpness.
With the Zilla, you could run 1440x1080p72 per projector on a ginormous 2.35 screen. That still gives you the ~4x3 aspect to fit the face of the tube, and a 2880 pixel wide unblended image-space to work with. At 1440x1080 in 2.35, the blending situation looks like this:
1080 x 2.35 = 2538 pixels, with no vertical scaling.
2880 - 2538 = 342 pixels for the blend zone.
342 / 2880 = ~12% overlap, which Tim has suggested is sufficient for the blend zone.
At 1440x1080x72hz, and assuming the same porches as the 1920x1080 scenario, the bandwith equation looks like this:
(1440+280) x 1125 x 72 = 138.3mhz.
So you're still coming in under the 148.5mhz point that most everyone else finds perfectly workable with the G90. Sports and HDTV in 1.78 stil runs in the unscaled 1920x1080 portion of the middle of the screen, but you gain the massive 2.35 presentation, and the screen masking would be easier to boot. I don't know if the Zilla can do this, but I can't imagine that Antorsae would have gone down this road if it wasn't feasable.
But I'm not sure if the Zilla does 1440x1080; Tim indicated that an update was in the works for 1080P. For now, I imagine that it works with PC resolutions and jumps from 1280x1024 to 1600x1200 per projector. At 60hz and 72hz for vertical refresh, this works out to a bandwidth (using the above assumptions) of:
(1600 + 280) x (1200 + 45) x 60 = 140.4mhz
(1600 + 280) x (1200 + 45) x 72 = 168.5mhz
I suppose you'd have to actually take a look and see if the added resolution at 1200p72 would be worth the softening versus the downscaling at 1024p72. This all assumes you give a hoot about these nits, but for 18K I sure wouldn't want to see either softening or judder in my picture.
One way or the other, really, you can't lose. Blend, stack, whatever. I would think the last word, and the one that would set your theater apart, would be the Zilla. With 2 G90s, I think it would be years before any digital comes along, at a comparable price, that would unseat your setup from the top of the HT pile.
Sorry for the unsolicited advice; I'm just vicariously thrilled to hear about what comes of this meet.