Originally Posted by pb_maxxx
i simply wouldn't make any judgements from a 12" x 15" inch sample. in fact, i personally use 2ft and 3ft samples and even then i don't entirely trust what i see. you really don't know entirely how it it'll translate into a 100"+ screen.
having said that... here's an example of a slightly ligther BW screen (background) and a silver fire screen (2.5oz of colorant).
the silver fire (inset) black levels are ever so slightly less that than the BW but what it gains in color vibrancy and white levels gives you a screen with greater detail and contrast.
--- for you... i'd recommend a silver fire lite screen using (1.75oz) of the colorant.
Not trying to start anything, just a very honest question(s).
You say there is more detail with SF... clearly there is more detail with the background screen based on that screenie. Just look at the parasail and there is no way anyone can say that test panel has 'greater detail and contrast'. What is the main screen? Looking at the SF panel and the parasail I cannot see any of the detail in the chute, for example the ribbing is completely lost as compared to the main screen. That certainly isn't greater detail and contrast, it is much worse.
I take it the panel way off to the right with no real image other than the water is the lighter BW. Would it be possible to see the panels swapped places to see the other test panel with the parasail? I really can't tell much from that comparison other than the main screen has better detail than the SF test panel, and the test panel to the far right looks more like any ocean or open water that I personally have seen. Trust me on that one, I have seen oceans all over the world- from the middle of the Atlantic, to the Med, to the carribean... Greece, the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea... so I'm pretty sure I can say I know what a variety of open water looks like from a variety of places.
Question, why does the far right panel have water up in the letterbox area? Was that digitally cropped in there? Just asking because that does look odd.
And before anyone goes ballistic, it's just an honest request. I personally think the main screen looks the best, the SF panel has no detail compared to the main screen, and the upper right panel looks more like what I have seen with open water.
My assessment is the whites are blooming and severly crushed on the SF panel and again, the main screen may have darker looking water but the whites hold their own against the SF panel. The third panel has the most realistic looking water, but other than that absolutely nothing can be gleened from that comparison.
Now... the SF panel very well may look a lot better if the projector is calibrated to it. I started a thread about the importance of calibration but that got dubbed 'Calibration- Possibly the Least important thing to read...'. I still whole heartedly stand behind that thread, but that is also another thread.
What I see here though is that a recalibration may make the SF screen look better, but based solely on this comparison, it didn't fare well to the main screen, and nothing can be determined based on the position of the far right test panel.
That's not a slam. I'm just saying that I don't see any better detail or contrast. Conversely I see over saturated colors and blooming whites. Again it may look better if the projector was calibrated to that panel, and also the far right panel didn't get a fair shake.
I happen to completely agree with pb on something, and that is test panels are very hard to determine how a full size screen will perform. I also make a full size screen if something looks promising. In that we are in full agreement on and I never was a big fan of small test panels, especially when a person tries comparing two vastly different shades (not saying pb did that here, but I have seen other's try to compare a white screen to a gray screen many times).
Also I am not saying SF is bad, just that based on what was shown I just don't see the better detail and more vivid image. I see overblown colors and whites. Again, if the PJ was recalibrated it might be a totally different story, but that's not what was presented and said.
PB can you do a bigger test panel of that SF sample and recalibrate? Also it would be nice to see a bigger split screen shot of the far right panel too, and with the projector recalibrated (if needed).
I will say though that it is a very bright screen sample. It just doesn't do justice to it in that screenie in my opinion, and the far right sample really shows nothing other than water. Get some color in the shot in that area or move the panel. (A screen or test panel is always going to look the best at the center of the projected image)
Don't take any offense, and this was not a thread hijack. I really would like to see the SF panel under better conditions. That shot definitely doesn't show it off at its best.