AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › HIGH POWER a Review! Part 1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HIGH POWER a Review! Part 1 - Page 55

post #1621 of 3741
6/19/09 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

I think you missed his point. The SS works better with the pj higher because it's angular reflective. The HP works with the pj as close to eye level as possible because it's retro reflective. You would have to have the pj in two places at once for the pics you took to give a true comparison.

Vutec recommends a ceiling mount for the SS, but only because they feel that gives the optimum uniformity. I don't believe it has any effect on the gain.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #1622 of 3741
6/19/09 at 5:25pm
I'll see if I can make this clearer. I guess I didn't do a very good job of that with my first explanation.

I started thinking about getting a new screen about 2 1/2 years ago. I had a 109" Stewart Firehawk screen that I'd used for a few years with three different DLP projectors. My projector at the time was a new Sharp 20K, mounted very high on a shelf. The center of the lens was probably about a foot (or less) below the top of the screen. The Sharp, set to high contrast mode and low lamp, was too dim for the 1.3 gain Firehawk. I needed more brightness.

I requested samples from Vutec and DaLite. (The DaLite HP sample was small, not even a foot square. The SS sample was a little bigger.) I hung them from my existing screen with string, so that they were at the same height and right next to the Firehawk surface (just about mid way down). I could see easily the relative gain of each surface from any position in the room. I used a full white screen from Photoshop, so no video would get in the way of my testing.

I stood on my couch and put my head right next to the projection lens. The HP sample exploded with brightness. At this point, the SS was significantly dimmer than the HP. It makes sense - maximum gain from the retro-reflective HP (my eyes literally 2-3 inches from the lens) and not nearly as much from the SS. The angular reflective SS works better with a ceiling mount, and the viewer in a lower position relative to the projector.

As I moved my head down, I could see the HP get dimmer. Makes sense - the further your head moves from the projection lens, the less light is collected by the HP's retro-reflective surface and bounced back to your eyes. That's the "cone" people always talk about with the HP. The further away in any direction you move, the dimmer the HP becomes. People seated far to the side see less and less benefit from the HP. That's why I always ask people what their seating arrangements will be. If a home theater is going to have viewers sitting on the edges of the screen (or even further to the side) on a regular basis, the HP probably isn't the right screen for them. Those people won't be getting the same viewing experience as the ones closer to the lens. Also, if the home theater owner has to ceiling mount for whatever reason, that person isn't going to benefit much from an HP. Drop your head 3 or 4 feet below the lens and the HP's gain drops dramatically.

As my head moved down, though, the good qualities of the SS began to manifest. The gain increased (while the HP gain decreased). At one point, the HP and the SS were at roughly the same brightness level. As I passed that point, the HP continued to dim and the SS got brighter, so that in effect they switched their relative brightness levels from the point in time in which my head was next to the projection lens. That's why I said photographs of the 2 screens were of very limited value in terms of overall brightness. Take a picture of the 2 screens with the camera next to the lens and the HP will appear brighter. Take a photo from a seated position (viewer down low and projector up high) and the SS will appear brighter. A single photo tells you almost nothing of value in terms of a comparison of the 2 screens.

As I moved around the room, 2 things were clear: the further from the projection lens I got, the dimmer the HP became; and, the SS maintained its side-to-side brightness far better than the HP.

Another benefit of moving around the room was that I picked up on the SS surface sheen. As I moved, even the small SS sample called attention to itself. I knew it would bother me. The HP sample's surface just disappeared - it was the same (except for brightness) no matter how I moved. At the same time, I was picking up on the snowy glistening of the Firehawk, as though I was looking at a blanket of snow. It wasn't quite that bad, but it's the closest analogy I can think of.

By the end of the experiment, I knew what I wanted. The Firehawk was too dim, no matter what. The SS sheen was too distracting. The HP was just about perfect. All I had to do was lower my projector height. Side to side viewing would not be a problem in my room. I figured out a way to do that and I've been a happy camper ever since.

The hard part of the experiment (not too hard, but it took a little time) was figuring out how to get the HP and SS samples next to the screen. After firing up the projector with the white Photoshop screen, it took about 30 seconds of moving my head around to see the differences among the screens. Of course, I tried the samples out with regular HD video, too. The results were not quite as "smack you in the face" obvious as the white screen, but they were all too clear. No contest. The HP won for image quality and brightness.

Is that any clearer?
Reply
Reply
post #1623 of 3741
6/19/09 at 5:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrd View Post

Vutec recommends a ceiling mount for the SS, but only because they feel that gives the optimum uniformity. I don't believe it has any effect on the gain.

Have to disagree. I saw it change. Even on the SS sample, there's an "up" arrow to make sure you orient it in the proper direction.

Anyone who's trying out samples should be able to duplicate my experience pretty easily.
Reply
Reply
post #1624 of 3741
6/19/09 at 6:02pm
I was prepared to buy the screen I liked the best when I was running the test, but I would have preferred to keep a high shelf mount. I liked having the projector up high and out of the way. Lowering the projector also involved some compromises with seating, and it cost more for the Chief mount. A high shelf mount also looks better in the room. More important to me, though, was getting the best quality image I could, and high gain. My Sharp is not a bright projector. Even though I had to work quite a bit harder to make the HP work, I've never regretted it. It was also cheaper by a wide, wide margin than the SS. It was cheaper than the Firehawk, too.
Reply
Reply
post #1625 of 3741
6/19/09 at 7:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I'll see if I can make this clearer. I guess I didn't do a very good job of that with my first explanation.

I started thinking about getting a new screen about 2 1/2 years ago. I had a 109" Stewart Firehawk screen that I'd used for a few years with three different DLP projectors. My projector at the time was a new Sharp 20K, mounted very high on a shelf. The center of the lens was probably about a foot (or less) below the top of the screen. The Sharp, set to high contrast mode and low lamp, was too dim for the 1.3 gain Firehawk. I needed more brightness.

I requested samples from Vutec and DaLite. (The DaLite HP sample was small, not even a foot square. The SS sample was a little bigger.) I hung them from my existing screen with string, so that they were at the same height and right next to the Firehawk surface (just about mid way down). I could see easily the relative gain of each surface from any position in the room. I used a full white screen from Photoshop, so no video would get in the way of my testing.

I stood on my couch and put my head right next to the projection lens. The HP sample exploded with brightness. At this point, the SS was significantly dimmer than the HP. It makes sense - maximum gain from the retro-reflective HP (my eyes literally 2-3 inches from the lens) and not nearly as much from the SS. The angular reflective SS works better with a ceiling mount, and the viewer in a lower position relative to the projector.

As I moved my head down, I could see the HP get dimmer. Makes sense - the further your head moves from the projection lens, the less light is collected by the HP's retro-reflective surface and bounced back to your eyes. That's the "cone" people always talk about with the HP. The further away in any direction you move, the dimmer the HP becomes. People seated far to the side see less and less benefit from the HP. That's why I always ask people what their seating arrangements will be. If a home theater is going to have viewers sitting on the edges of the screen (or even further to the side) on a regular basis, the HP probably isn't the right screen for them. Those people won't be getting the same viewing experience as the ones closer to the lens. Also, if the home theater owner has to ceiling mount for whatever reason, that person isn't going to benefit much from an HP. Drop your head 3 or 4 feet below the lens and the HP's gain drops dramatically.

As my head moved down, though, the good qualities of the SS began to manifest. The gain increased (while the HP gain decreased). At one point, the HP and the SS were at roughly the same brightness level. As I passed that point, the HP continued to dim and the SS got brighter, so that in effect they switched their relative brightness levels from the point in time in which my head was next to the projection lens. That's why I said photographs of the 2 screens were of very limited value in terms of overall brightness. Take a picture of the 2 screens with the camera next to the lens and the HP will appear brighter. Take a photo from a seated position (viewer down low and projector up high) and the SS will appear brighter. A single photo tells you almost nothing of value in terms of a comparison of the 2 screens.

As I moved around the room, 2 things were clear: the further from the projection lens I got, the dimmer the HP became; and, the SS maintained its side-to-side brightness far better than the HP.

Another benefit of moving around the room was that I picked up on the SS surface sheen. As I moved, even the small SS sample called attention to itself. I knew it would bother me. The HP sample's surface just disappeared - it was the same (except for brightness) no matter how I moved. At the same time, I was picking up on the snowy glistening of the Firehawk, as though I was looking at a blanket of snow. It wasn't quite that bad, but it's the closest analogy I can think of.

By the end of the experiment, I knew what I wanted. The Firehawk was too dim, no matter what. The SS sheen was too distracting. The HP was just about perfect. All I had to do was lower my projector height. Side to side viewing would not be a problem in my room. I figured out a way to do that and I've been a happy camper ever since.

The hard part of the experiment (not too hard, but it took a little time) was figuring out how to get the HP and SS samples next to the screen. After firing up the projector with the white Photoshop screen, it took about 30 seconds of moving my head around to see the differences among the screens. Of course, I tried the samples out with regular HD video, too. The results were not quite as "smack you in the face" obvious as the white screen, but they were all too clear. No contest. The HP won for image quality and brightness.

Is that any clearer?

I think you've given a very fare and accurate assessment of the pros and cons of these two screens. I'm a fan of the HP because I can set things up optimally for it: my pj is on a stand, just behind and between two recliners for my wife and I, who are just about the only viewers (girls are married, etc.); pj's only a ft above and behind our heads (forturnately the RS20 is quiet as a mouse--don't hear it at all with 68 yr old ears, but fortunately one can crank up the volume as necessary!). So if one's room and life style lends itself to such a set up, it's just about perfect. But it does have the limitations you describe very well.
Reply
Reply
post #1626 of 3741
6/19/09 at 7:15pm
Ok so were going back and fourth about the angle of the ss, and as I stated before, when my projector was mounted on the ceiling the SS looked pretty good, when I moved the projector down to eye level the SS looked exactly the same, no brighter no dimmer.

Now here is another example, pic taken of no country for old men, 1st pic is of the SS with projector mounted on CEILING, with sony DSL cammera set to 200 iso, the shutteer speed set at 1.3, and the aprature set at 5.6.

2nd photo I overid the cammera (took it out of auto mode) and locked in the same settings as above 200iso, 1.3shutter and 5.6 apature. So in other words same exact cammera settings and position and frame as you can see. But now with the HP screen. Now you can see how the image is so much brighter, in comparison. Naturaly setings on the cammera for the ss were just to sensitive when it came to the HP screen shot.

Hope this helps??



Reply
Reply
post #1627 of 3741
6/19/09 at 7:39pm
Hey, deanzsyclone. I think we're talking about 2 different ways of comparing the 2 screens. I didn't move my projector during the testing. I just moved my head around. I'd have to use video to show what I saw. Still images would never work. I also knew from the way I did it what kind of gain I was likely to get from each screen, based on where my projector was going to be. In your photos, it's hard to tell the position of the camera relative to the projector lens. That's important in understanding how bright the HP looks.

The way I tested the samples made it easy for me to determine how the screens would perform in my room. The only important thing for me regarding the SS was that I knew it would give me the brightness I needed with a ceiling mounted projector, but that the sheen would be too distracting. The HP's surface was far and away the best of the 3, but I'd have to find a way to mount the projector lower to get the gain I wanted. That's all I needed to know, and once I was finished that day, I knew what I needed to do to get the HP working in my room.
Reply
Reply
post #1628 of 3741
6/19/09 at 9:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

In your photos, it's hard to tell the position of the camera relative to the projector lens. That's important in understanding how bright the HP looks.

How about I just tell you then? Cammera was sitting on top of the projector (eye level), and projector no longer mounted to ceiling, it was at slightly higher than chair level. Helpful??
Reply
Reply
post #1629 of 3741
6/19/09 at 9:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by deanzsyclone View Post

How about I just tell you then? Cammera was sitting on top of the projector (eye level), and projector no longer mounted to ceiling, it was at slightly higher than chair level. Helpful??

Yes, it is helpful. With the camera mounted on top of the projector, the HP is going to be at just about max gain, and thus the increased brightness over the SS is very understandable. The SS should be less bright, I would think, since the angle should be reflecting a greater amount of light downward, a few feet under the projector. In other words, if you lowered the camera 3-4 feet and took the shot from there, the brightness levels should reverse, or at least become much closer. That's consistent with what I saw in my test.
Reply
Reply
post #1630 of 3741
6/19/09 at 10:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I think you've given a very fare and accurate assessment of the pros and cons of these two screens. I'm a fan of the HP because I can set things up optimally for it: my pj is on a stand, just behind and between two recliners for my wife and I, who are just about the only viewers (girls are married, etc.); pj's only a ft above and behind our heads (forturnately the RS20 is quiet as a mouse--don't hear it at all with 68 yr old ears, but fortunately one can crank up the volume as necessary!). So if one's room and life style lends itself to such a set up, it's just about perfect. But it does have the limitations you describe very well.

You know, after reading more on the RS-20, I was unclear if the shadow detail is much better at high gamma than my Sharp 20K. (I know the black level is better. No contest there.) Do you know what your gamma is, and if it's high (2.4 or so), how's the shadow detail?

As I said some time ago, I have to use a lower gamma. I have a hard time not losing shadow detail when the Sharp's gamma is that high. My eyes are aging, too.
Reply
Reply
post #1631 of 3741
6/19/09 at 10:24pm
I don't use a super high gamma since my room is not a true batcave (though it's pretty good). A gamma ~ 2.2 to 2.3 is what I find best. The 'A' gamma pre-set is very nice for my setup--~ 2.3, then shading up to 2.2 or so at the lowest IRE.

I've not seen a Sharp 20K, though know for reputation that it is a very fine unit. I might have gone with a dlp if there had been one with the short throw that I need in my room setup (< 1.5 throw ratio). The Planar 8150 does fit that with its short throw lens, but that's a sizable extra cost, and when I saw the Planar and RS20 at CEDIA in Denver last year I decided that I preferred the JVC (though I also thought the Planar was also very, very nice). And I sympathize re your eyes, as mine are now 68 yrs old.
Reply
Reply
post #1632 of 3741
6/20/09 at 1:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

I was considering a Dalite Perm wall 133" High Power screen. The builder made the lower 1/2 of the wall protrode 8 inches vs top, forming an 8 inch shelf" sort of like my ascii art below. Is permwall stiff enough to just hang from the wall. Otherwise i was considering making a rectangular Hardwood 2x1 inch frame, mount permwall to it and then mount it to my wall.

What do you think?
|
|_
=|
=|

I would prefer not do go to DaSnap because the price goes up 50% - on principle it feel like a ripoff vs what carada charges !! I;m thinking model C left permanently open - if my situation is not feasible - just don't want any waves.

Anyone who has a permwall or DIY or just someone smarter than me(not hard) got any advice?
Reply
Reply
post #1633 of 3741
6/20/09 at 7:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I don't use a super high gamma since my room is not a true batcave (though it's pretty good). A gamma ~ 2.2 to 2.3 is what I find best. The 'A' gamma pre-set is very nice for my setup--~ 2.3, then shading up to 2.2 or so at the lowest IRE.

I've not seen a Sharp 20K, though know for reputation that it is a very fine unit. I might have gone with a dlp if there had been one with the short throw that I need in my room setup (< 1.5 throw ratio). The Planar 8150 does fit that with its short throw lens, but that's a sizable extra cost, and when I saw the Planar and RS20 at CEDIA in Denver last year I decided that I preferred the JVC (though I also thought the Planar was also very, very nice). And I sympathize re your eyes, as mine are now 68 yrs old.

I'm going to have to try to get to Cedia this year. Do you know where it's going to be? I haven't been to a show like that for a long time. Meanwhile, I'd still like to see an RS20 somewhere close to the St. Louis area. Is there an RS20 owner somewhere close by in Missouri or Illinois who wouldn't mind my coming by to take a look?
Reply
Reply
post #1634 of 3741
6/20/09 at 8:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Anyone who has a permwall or DIY or just someone smarter than me(not hard) got any advice?

The HP is a very heavy duty material. I'm not sure a 1x2 would provide enough support. It shouldn't be too hard to fashion a frame for it, though. I think I'd consider something more substantial than 1x2's. You might want to use a 1x2 frame attached to 2x4's that you could overlap onto the shelf.


[[[[]]
[[[[]]
[[[[]]
[[[[]]
[[[[]]
[[[[]]
----]]
----]]
----]]
----]]
----]]
Reply
Reply
post #1635 of 3741
6/20/09 at 10:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Anyone who has a permwall or DIY or just someone smarter than me(not hard) got any advice?

I thought about the permwall for my 126" diag HP but was afraid it would be too flemsy, so got the Da-Snap (I wanted a rather thin frame, rather than the wider Cinema Contour). It has been excellent. Contact Jason at AVS for a good price.
Reply
Reply
post #1636 of 3741
6/20/09 at 11:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I thought about the permwall for my 126" diag HP but was afraid it would be too flemsy, so got the Da-Snap (I wanted a rather thin frame, rather than the wider Cinema Contour). It has been excellent. Contact Jason at AVS for a good price.

Joseph, Miller thanks for your advice.

Miller,
Do you feel the da-snap is rigid enough to be hung from bracket offset from wall? The da-snap on pricegrabber was about $400 more than Perm-wall which is in turn $300 more than model C. i think the $400 delta could be better invested in furniture or better speakers than a frame if the image is the same in the end (just my own opinion)

Joseph, i guess builting up a wood frame to fix the offset is an option. i wonder if there are some nice steel rods/plate i can buy to enforce the frame instead of 2x4s - i'll check out home depot too
Reply
Reply
post #1637 of 3741
6/20/09 at 11:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Miller,
Do you feel the da-snap is rigid enough to be hung from bracket offset from wall? The da-snap on pricegrabber was about $400 more than Perm-wall which is in turn $300 more than model C. i think the $400 delta could be better invested in furniture or better speakers than a frame if the image is the same in the end (just my own opinion)

Yes. The Da-Snap comes with wall brackets on which it is hung. Since my screen covers up a window (that my wife agreed to giving up!), it had to clear the window sill; so I screwed a 2x4 to the wall above the window and screwed the DaSnap mounting brackets onto it. Works just fine, and the screen is ~ 3" away from the wall.
Reply
Reply
post #1638 of 3741
6/20/09 at 8:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Joseph, Miller thanks for your advice.

Miller,
Do you feel the da-snap is rigid enough to be hung from bracket offset from wall? The da-snap on pricegrabber was about $400 more than Perm-wall which is in turn $300 more than model C. i think the $400 delta could be better invested in furniture or better speakers than a frame if the image is the same in the end (just my own opinion)

Joseph, i guess builting up a wood frame to fix the offset is an option. i wonder if there are some nice steel rods/plate i can buy to enforce the frame instead of 2x4s - i'll check out home depot too

Going on "lights on" aesthetics only, I would opt for a Model C over a Perm-Wall. Our local Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant has Perm-wall screens....and they look like absolute do-do IMO. The only way I would consider a Perm-wall was if I was going to install a masking system or something else that would hide the frame. I don't really understand the major upcharge difference Da-Lite charges for their fixed frame screens beyond the Perm-wall........but it is still worth it IMO.
Reply
Reply
post #1639 of 3741
7/20/09 at 3:37am
JUst got my permwall high power screen. Mounted it on to rectagular frame made of 2x4s to my offset walls; perfect solutionf or $30 worth of material. My only disappointment so far is taht when i unrolled the screen a found powery residue when some 1/2" long by few mm wide white marks that look black w/camera flash. I was able to emulate the look by scratch my old dalite sample square.

Anyone had good luck exchanging screens w/dalite?
Other than that, i'd also love to know if anyone has a epson 6500UB and how much they had to increase any of the color settings (red i heard is a bit low) to calibrate it right.
Reply
Reply
post #1640 of 3741
7/20/09 at 8:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

JUst got my permwall high power screen. Mounted it on to rectagular frame made of 2x4s to my offset walls; perfect solutionf or $30 worth of material. My only disappointment so far is taht when i unrolled the screen a found powery residue when some 1/2" long by few mm wide white marks that look black w/camera flash. I was able to emulate the look by scratch my old dalite sample square.

Anyone had good luck exchanging screens w/dalite?
Other than that, i'd also love to know if anyone has a epson 6500UB and how much they had to increase any of the color settings (red i heard is a bit low) to calibrate it right.

Before you send it back, try cleaning it. Cleaning solutions are listed on the DaLite site, but I used eyeglass cleaner and a microfiber cloth. My HP had a considerable amount of some sort of residue on it from the factory, but it cleaned up nicely.
Reply
Reply
post #1641 of 3741
7/20/09 at 11:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Anyone had good luck exchanging screens w/dalite?
Other than that, i'd also love to know if anyone has a epson 6500UB and how much they had to increase any of the color settings (red i heard is a bit low) to calibrate it right.

Well, we're in the wrong thread, and I've never owned an Epson, but every unit will have different OTB variation. While I don't know about the 6500, IIRC, Jason Turk said the previous 1080 UB had even more OTB variation than typical. He did not imply at all that it wasn't a great performer, only that individual calibration was even more imperative. HTH.
Reply
Reply
post #1642 of 3741
7/20/09 at 2:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

Before you send it back, try cleaning it. Cleaning solutions are listed on the DaLite site, but I used eyeglass cleaner and a microfiber cloth. My HP had a considerable amount of some sort of residue on it from the factory, but it cleaned up nicely.

yeah i messaged dalite they recommended denature alcohol (which i presume is the standard disinfectant rubbing alcohol). I just sent pictures w/close up to the guy i bought it from, i just don't want to do more damage since when i wiped with a moist (not soaked) cottom cloth in one direction, it appeared to do more smearing than cleaning.

I was just wondering in general if dalite has been really good w/exchanges if the screen indeed can't be cleaned up.
Reply
Reply
post #1643 of 3741
7/20/09 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jostenmeat View Post

Well, we're in the wrong thread, and I've never owned an Epson, but every unit will have different OTB variation. While I don't know about the 6500, IIRC, Jason Turk said the previous 1080 UB had even more OTB variation than typical. He did not imply at all that it wasn't a great performer, only that individual calibration was even more imperative. HTH.

hmm, sorry if it's the wrong thread. I already had my epson calibrated for a white wall. I was just wondering how much color the screen typically imbued (drop in red, blue push, etc) and people's experience. I guess i just invest in a AVIVA DVD in any case though
Reply
Reply
post #1644 of 3741
7/20/09 at 8:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

Other than that, i'd also love to know if anyone has a epson 6500UB and how much they had to increase any of the color settings (red i heard is a bit low) to calibrate it right.

I'm running my 6500UB on Theatre Black 1, with no calibration, and a Model C HP screen. The colours look just fine to me

My friend's gf just started working for a high end projection engineering firm. I'm waiting for her to be trained for some professional calibration heheh
Reply
Reply
post #1645 of 3741
7/20/09 at 9:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

yeah i messaged dalite they recommended denature alcohol (which i presume is the standard disinfectant rubbing alcohol). I just sent pictures w/close up to the guy i bought it from, i just don't want to do more damage since when i wiped with a moist (not soaked) cottom cloth in one direction, it appeared to do more smearing than cleaning.

I was just wondering in general if dalite has been really good w/exchanges if the screen indeed can't be cleaned up.

From what I've read, DaLite is pretty good about making good on defective screens.

BTW, a damp cloth may be deceptive initially. I was a little concerned when I tried to clean my screen the first time. It seemed to smear. It actually wasn't smearing at all, but just that the surface doesn't dry very rapidly, added to the fact that the "clean" cloth I used wasn't as clean as I thought.

Try this - get a really clean, lint free cloth and buff the area you suspect may be defective with denatured alcohol. That's a very high percentage alcohol, not the typical rubbing alcohol. You shouldn't have any trouble getting it in a drugstore. Then, buff out the area you cleaned with another clean, soft, dry cloth until the area is no longer looks wet. When I did that (but with eye glass cleaner, not alcohol), the area I cleaned looked significantly cleaner and brighter than the rest of the screen. I had to go over the whole surface to make sure it was free of any residue. I was shocked at how much better it looked than when I started.

I think that if the screen surface was actually damaged, it would be obvious. I doubt you'd have a question in your mind about it. I had to work pretty hard to cause the sample they sent me to fail. (I was trying to find out what I'd have to do to damage my actual screen.) When it did fail, the area where it flaked off was quite obviously ruined. I suspect yours is just dirty. If you do the cleaning, you'll know for sure. The surface is pretty tough, so you can rub fairly hard to get the grime off (within reason, of course). If, after you clean it, it still looks the same, you'll know for sure something has happened to it.
Reply
Reply
post #1646 of 3741
7/23/09 at 3:12pm
Regarding the HP, if projector should be at or near viewer eye level, how have you folks addressed projector noise. I would think it more of an issue compared to a ceiling mount........or is a couple feet above eye level still acceptable. I'm thinking that a projector at eye level pretty much needs to be in fron, beside or directly behind the viewer but a couple feet higher and you have flexibility to move it back quite a bit further.
Reply
Reply
post #1647 of 3741
7/23/09 at 3:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrimpin View Post

Regarding the HP, if projector should be at or near viewer eye level, how have you folks addressed projector noise. ...

It depends on the pj. With the JVC RS20, e.g., or the Sony's (I believe), noise is not a problem even if the pj is within 2 ft of your head; at least this is what I find. DLP pj's are noisier, though, so you need to check out very carefully what pj you have or are interested in.
Reply
Reply
post #1648 of 3741
7/23/09 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrimpin View Post

Regarding the HP, if projector should be at or near viewer eye level, how have you folks addressed projector noise. I would think it more of an issue compared to a ceiling mount........or is a couple feet above eye level still acceptable. I'm thinking that a projector at eye level pretty much needs to be in fron, beside or directly behind the viewer but a couple feet higher and you have flexibility to move it back quite a bit further.

I have the sony vpl-vw100 and it sits about 2 feet from my head, I don't hear a thing!
Reply
Reply
post #1649 of 3741
7/23/09 at 4:22pm
My RS10 is at eye level, but about four feet behind me. I use low lamp (Normal) and hear nothing. I could hear my previous Epson Home 1080 slightly (also on low lamp).
Reply
Reply
post #1650 of 3741
7/23/09 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by amp3d1 View Post

JUst got my permwall high power screen. Mounted it on to rectagular frame made of 2x4s to my offset walls; perfect solutionf or $30 worth of material. My only disappointment so far is taht when i unrolled the screen a found powery residue when some 1/2" long by few mm wide white marks that look black w/camera flash. I was able to emulate the look by scratch my old dalite sample square.

Anyone had good luck exchanging screens w/dalite?
Other than that, i'd also love to know if anyone has a epson 6500UB and how much they had to increase any of the color settings (red i heard is a bit low) to calibrate it right.

This sounds more like a defect. I have seen HP screens that have been torqued or creased causing the microbeads to come loose in a line. Looks like a white line to the naked eye but under projection it comes out as black marks.

By the way, I have my rs10 almost level with the 2nd row heads and PJ noise is no problem at all.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Screens

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › HIGH POWER a Review! Part 1