HIGH POWER a Review! Part 1 - Page 10

I followed Da-Lites instructions pretty much to the "T" with my 133" Da-Snap hi-power. One bit of advice I can give is to don't try to do it by yourself. I had someone help me. One person would hold/keep the tension on the screen fabric while the other would "snap" the snaps. There are several snaps on the 133" and our hands were a bit sore by the time we were done.

It's worth it though as the screen looks fantastic. I've had it for a few months and I'm still thrilled with it. I just can't wait for my new RS-1 to come in. .

Ken

That won't happen. It doesn't work that way. No matter where you sit, the image brightness top to bottom, left to right will be even. The lower your seating position is, however, the dimmer the screen will be. It's the distance of your eyes from the center of the projector's lens that matters. Too far from lens center and you won't realize much gain from the screen. It could even be less than you're getting now, depending how far off center the viewing position is.

There's a calculator earlier that should give you a clear idea about the amount of gain you can expect, depending on your room conditions.

Joe,

My hat's off to you for the excellent job you've done so far in conveying your impressions on the performance of the HP. With that said, I believe the statement above may be a little over the top with regards to the HP vs. SS and I'm sorry to say that I'm having a great deal of difficulty with it.

Please don't take this the wrong way but I seriously can't understand how you could possibly evaluate the brightness uniformity of either brand with the small samples you have at your disposal. Could you please elaborate on this? Were you projecting a solid color or was it a mixed scene from a movie? Any further details you can provide on this are appreciated.

You're right, it's not fair for me to have made such statements without seeing a larger area of the SS screen.

Here's what I did: I placed the smaller HP sample over the larger SS sample and moved it around at different angles from the light source (both my Sharp 20000 with a frozen static snowy scene and an overhead light). Held this way, the HP sample was the larger part of the sample surface - roughly 75% vs 25% for the SS. In each case, it seemed to me that the HP sample maintained a uniform brightness, whether that was low gain or high gain - off axis from the projections lens or light source, or reflecting that source straight back. The SS, it seemed to me, displayed an uneven illumination. That contrast seemed more pronounced because I had the HP sample right on top of it. The edge to brightness varied from the SS to the HP, depending on the angle from the light, but the uniformity was maintained with the HP, and not the SS.

When I positioned the SS sample in front of my Firehawk, so that the entire surface of the SS sample could be compared to the Firehawk, I noticed a sheen on the SS sample. It was different than the Firehawk sheen (which is probably better described as a sparkly sheen). From my normal viewing distance of about 12', the sheen was noticeable on both.

Anyway, that is what I got from the samples I was sent. I know I preferred the overall look and uniformity of the HP to both the SS and my old Firehawk. I had no way of evaluating a larger surface for the SS, since I don't know anyone who has one, but I can say that my impression of the HP didn't change substantially from viewing the sample to seeing the 110" screen in place. Since the sheen was visible even on a very small SS sample to me, it seems unlikely it would be better with a larger sample.

Trying not to be over the top here. If you want a negative, I do think the viewing cone is quite small to realize the gain I want for my Sharp 20000, but I will be able to achieve it. I don't think a lot of people will be able to. Whether they will be happy may well depend on how bright their projector is. If I use my Sharp in low lamp/high contrast mode, it's more than acceptable in the cone, but much outside that cone and it's too dim.

That said, I see no downside for me so far. I really like the image, and I'm going to be able to get the brightness I want.

YMMV.

Yes, I did this alone. It would have been easier with some help. Once the frame was
on edge, though, it was quite easy.

Joe,

Thanks for clarifying what you saw and I hope to have not offended you, I just found it difficult to understand your observations with the small sample you had. I'm curious if you could see this brightness non-uniformity on the SS sample without the HP sample being laid over top or when projecting a solid white image?

I find it interesting that you describe the sheen on the Firehawk to be sparkly. I have heard of people saying the same of the SS but even when I could see it I never thought it looked that way to me but I really couldn't find the right words to describe it.

I honestly wasn't looking for any negatives with regards to the HP and am glad that you're able to get it working in your set up and are happy with it. Like I said earlier, I'm considering getting a 11' wide 2.35:1 HP for myself and your detailed reviews are most helpful.

Absolutely no offense taken. I'm new to these screen threads, and I'm so very far from being an expert on any of this. I've been pretty happy with my Firehawk for about 5 years now, but with the Sharp I decided I wanted to try to get the most from the projector in terms of contrast. I knew after a short while with the old screen that I wasn't going to be happy with the low light. Once the bulb aged, I knew it was going to be far too dim to enjoy.

I wouldn't describe the SS "sheen" as sparkly. I think the texture is too smooth to call it sparkly or glittery. That's how I would describe the Firehawk sheen - sort of how the sun glistens on a blanket of snow. The SS sheen is more even - like pewter that isn't evenly buffed. It just highlights, and I could see it even with the small sample (with or without the HP sample on top). It didn't have that nearly perfect neutrality that the HP has. BTW, you can take those "glistening snow" and "unevenly buffed pewter" metaphors and divide them by 5. The screen effects are much more subtle.

I have the 110" SS after owning the same size HP. From my perspectice there is no comparison. The uniformity across the image is equal. Both are great. Where the HP loses out is the uniformity of gain from different seating positions in my 15' wide HT. The Hp drove me crazy when moving from the couple of seats in the viewing cone to just outside this cone. This was unacceptable for me to have my guests not benefit from the same picture I was enjoying. In my estimation the differences are much greater than the HP lovers are willing to admit. The HP is a great screen for two people to watch. The SS is a fantastic screen for the whole audience. I realize there is a hefty premium for the SS but I think it is worth it. It is the last screen I will buy. It makes my very modestly priced Mits HD 1000 look unbelievable.

There is no way you can fairly evaluate any screen from the small samples that are provided.

Interesting report. Can you compare how the 2 screens compared wrt ambient light, either external or that reflected off ceiling/walls? TIA

Thanks for clarifying. As I said, the viewing cone for the HP is pretty small. In my theater (only 11' wide), my seating is all within the screen width. The HP works well for me, but for others the benefits of the HP would be limited. Curious, though, that you don't see any sheen with the SS. At least that's how I would describe the effect I see. Since the questions have been raised, I've looked again several times, and the effect seems real to me. Maybe over a larger surface it isn't apparent.

Many people have commented on this 'sheen' of the SS screen; some are bothered by it, and some are not. So it's good that we have choices! My room situation is much like yours; nobody will be viewing from outside the width of the screen. So I think the HP is clearly the one for me.

Well... I finally got my sample today!! Yea!!

I put up the 12" sample on my SS, and from my viewing position in the back row, directly under the projector, there is a bit more brightness. From the seat directly in front of me, it matches the Silverstar, and in the seats off to the sides, it is slightly dimmer than the SS.

My plan is to get a pull down HP, and use it mostly for my viewing, and perhaps for all viewing, but if I find I have an issue with it being too dim to the sides, when I have a full house, I can always switch back to the SS.

Now, here is my dilemma. I have a Sharp 20K, and, if I stay with this projector, I would want to match my 120" SS size, or go a hair smaller. I am, however on the RS1 preorder, and If I like that projector, it is going to be significantly brighter than the Sharp. So, I am not sure if I want to size the screen for the Sharp, or for the JVC.

I am leaning towards sizing it for the Sharp, since I can always use ND filters, on the JVC, and my screen size is already pretty ideal. Any thoughts??

Kudos to Carada and Dalite, I ordered sample by email and received them in just a couple of days. While I had only asked for three samples from DL, they sent my a complete packet.

I always thought that I'd get a Carada 2.35 BW. Since I'm just getting started with the setup, my current screen is nothing more than a piece of luan ply with two coats of white primer on it. I had set that up just to get an idea of what size screen would make sense for where we sit and what we view.

To all who viewed it, the Carada BW screen looked identical to the primed ply. From all viewing angles. The Carada had less "texture" to it, but I was anticipating a brighter pic than the ply.

The Dalite HP? Wow. I was shocked at the pop. My projector is right behind and slightly (15") above my head, recessed into the back wall. The HP is technically near-perfect with these viewing angles.

I was also impressed with how the screen disppeared when compared to some of the other high gain screen samples. Some of the others were slightly sparkly, or the screen material suddenly rendered itself apparent to the eye in certain screen shots.

The HP really stood apart from the other higher gain screens by...well, by not standing out.

Where the HP really intrigued me was with rejection of ambient light. I have two 150watt pendant lights on the ceiling, between the viewers and the screen. With those lights on, the screen still popped. The room was bright, but the screen? It was brighter!

It was remarkably bright when compared to the other screen materials and my cheesey primed plywood.

I do almost think there is too much "pop" for dark room, light controlled, cinema viewing. I was almost thinking of potential problems with eye fatigue from too bright a picture. I'm going to try tweaking the projector's controls to dim the projector as see how the screen looks.

Still, this would be a fabulous screen for daytime or bright room viewing, or when ambient light is desired for picking the chip dust out of your belly button while watching NFL games, etc.

Still, the success of the Dalite HP technology comes down to where your projector is in relation to the viewer's eyeballs. It's definitely right for some setups, it's definitely wrong for others. "Wrong" may be poor word choice, because the screen still offers a quality picture when viewed off-axis, but you're not going to take advantage to the high gain.

In my situation, the three center seats get a big gain pop. Huge. The two seats to either side are slightly less, but still brighter than the Carada BW.

And with lights on, it's light rejection ability blows the other materials away.

I'm pretty happy, but I still have more head scratching to do, as I feel I'm being tugged down another unexpected path.

Live and learn. Learn and live.

And I'm certainly learning from you'z folks. Thanks much!

Mongo

Good info mongo. I hope to have my HP next week.

I installed my Chief mounting gear today. In my small theater, the projector has always been on a high shelf, about 7' up. With the Chief gear, I was able to flip the projector over and mount it on the underside of the shelf. I got a 1 1/2' adjustable pole (it telescopes from 12" to 18"). Total drop for the lens was more than 2 1/2'. I'm getting so much brightness now that I have the option of raising the pj by as much as 6" and still having more than enough brightness for the Sharp 20k in its best mode (low lamp/high contrast).

One note on the Chief gear. I got the CMS series, which allows for easy cable routing. The power and HDMI cable both fit through the center post and are pretty much hidden from view as they tail out the back of the 18" pole a couple of inches above the projector. I used an HDMI cable, because DVI connectors are too big to fit through the Chief pole. An HDMI cable with a DVI adpater will work, if need be. That's what I'm using (along with a Geffen DVI booster for my unusually long DVI cable run from a Lumagen video processor).

With the projector's lens at this height, I'm getting close to optimum gain. (Eye level is now about a foot below the lens and no more than two feet left or right for the main seats.) The image may be just a little too bright, but I doubt I'll do anything about it. I like bright, and by the end of the lamp's life, it might be just about right.

The HP is definitely not for all situations, but I'm glad I found a way to make it work in my room. It's a big step up from the Firehawk. One thing that the Firehawk did a little bit better was maintain contrast in ambient light, but in almost every other respect I like the HP better. I have a batcave, so ambient light is not a concern. My brightness concerns are all gone. The image really pops.

I mounted a 110" cinema contour hi-power by my self yesterday.I think it is not to hard to get all or most of three sides snapped while the screen is lying on the floor,it is that fourth side that would be hard to do that way.

I did all of the left side snaps,any one side with nothing else snapped yet is very easy.Then I went from the bottom side to the top side snapping about 2' at a time toward the right side,this is not too hard because you are pulling parralel with the snaps.

Then I stood it up on its bottom edge and snapped half way down the right side,stood it up on the top edge and finished the right side.
I don't think I could have done the right side by myself with the screen lying on the floor,but it was pretty easy this way.

While I had the screen standing on its top and bottom sides,I also felt all the snaps on the screen and found two I had not completely seated.This was much easier to check for with the screen standing up.

I too have a batcave and I am willing to live within the "cone" if it means a super image.

Hi,
I'm thinking on buying a 106" diagonal HP screen and my viewing distance is about 13 ft. my sofa is 9 ft. wide, will the viewers on the sides of the sofa see a good picture?

Thanks

Ok, Here is what I would like to do, perhaps someone can help me with the angles thing to see it there is going to be enough benefit for me?

78' x 139" contour electrol.

1) Bottom of screen 2.5ft from floor
2) Primary seating at 15'-16' from screen
3) Projector wall mounted 7' above floor, 20' back from screen. I can't go any lower because it is over a doorway.


How much gain do you think I will see?

Thanks!

I'm happy within the cone. I'm close enough to the optimum viewing area that I'm getting close to full brightness from the screen. There's a calculator earlier in the thread which you can use to figure out how much gain you're going to get. You plug in the relevant numbers and it gives you a very good idea of how much of an increase you'll see from a particular spot.

My impression is that you can be very happy with the screen if: you have a small room but can stay close the lens (up, down, left, right), or, you have a larger room and are viewing from much further back. The further back you sit, you bigger the cone gets.

Since for about 98% of the time it's just a couple of us watching (4 at most), I can live with dropping the projector down to where I had to put it in my small space. For those times when we have several more people over, I can put the projector back where it was (on the shelf) and switch the projector to high lamp and/or wider open iris. People with a larger space for a home theater will be able to realize greater benefit more of the time.

in my room I sit 16 ft backwith a 133 diag screen and a ceiling mount projector. The picture is great .a positive gain is a plus. when I have a full room i have a L shaped couch somebody sits apx 11 foot back and is even with edge of screen picture is okay not great (nobody complains) i am more then happy with this as 80% of the time its its only a few people watching and everybody gets the benefit of positive gain .so why get a screen where if you are in the cone 80 % of the time and you dont get the benifit of positive gain experience for only 20 % of the time the few people at the edge of the room can achive a 1.0 gain?

Free,
Are you planning on keeping the Sharp after the JVC comes in? I assume you'll use the JVC as your principal PJ once it gets in. The first thing I'd do is play with them both for awhile and see just how much brighter the JVC is than the Sharp. Maybe it won't be too much. I'd be real curious as to what the JVC looks like on the SS.

doh

Javry, I am not sure how it will all turn out. I have two concerns about the JVC. One is that it won't be Sharp enough, and the other, is the unknown contribution that the Sharp's high ansi cr makes to the image.

If the brightness numbers hold up, I expect the JVC to be between 450 and 600 lumens, depending on lamp mode. My Sharp, right now, with 200hrs on the bulb, is coming in at around 200lm in High Contrast mode, and about 275 in Medium Contrast mode, with high lamp, so it should be significantly dimmer than the JVC.

I also plan on having the High Power by then, so I will see how both projectors look on both types of screen. It really will be the best test of the very best in each category.

Free,

I'm thinking about raising my Sharp 20k as high as I can with the telescoping Chief pole. It's a little too bright on a bulb with 200+ hours on it. I keep going back and forth on whether to do this - I do like bright. It's not calibrated yet, but Tom Huffman reports that it loses little if any brightness after calibration. (I have set color temp to 6500, High Contrast iris, economy lamp.)

One thing is certain from where I sit: the Sharp when mated with the HP has killer performance, as long as you are within the cone. And that's in economy lamp/High Contrast mode! Killer - it should be arrested.

I hear you Joe, it is a phenomenal projector, and combined with the High Power I can imagine would be even better than my SS. It is so close at the factory 6500 setting, I don't think the brightness will change much after you calibrate it.

That's what Tom said, too. I watched Smallville on the High Power/Sharp tonight. I hadn't seen it since it went on hiatus last Nov. or Dec. It was like watching a different show. The dark scenes had so much more depth and contrast, and I could pick up on so much more detail in dark areas of the picture. Unless they suddenly started shooting that show with a new lighting director (it really looks like it - does anyone know if that happened?), the combo of the HP and Sharp reveals a lot more than I ever saw with my Optoma H79.

Free,
it sounds liike you have your work cut out for you. I'm sure you've thought about this but here are the obvious four configurations you'll have at your disposal.

JVC>>>>>>>> HP
JVC>>>>>>>> SS

Sharp>>>>>> HP
Sharp>>>>>> SS

If it is indeed true that the only real difference between the SS and the HP is how they perform in the cone periphery, then it's going to be interesting to see how the tie-breaker goes and which one you end up with as your favorite. your'e going to have four top end combinations to play with. That's exciting! Just for grins, I'm going to go out on a limb and wager the JVC >>>>>>SS as the winner.....mainly because I'm sure everyone else will go for the JVC and the HP

I have a light controlled dark painted room and I'm thinking about buying one of the 1080p LCD projectors such as the ae1000, HC5000 or the tw1000. Screen size would be about 100"-110" diagonal (16X9), will the HP still be the best choice or perhaps a grey screen or even a white 1.2 gain screen would be a better choice?

Okay, I've been lurking for a while and trying to pick up some info (you guys really know your stuff!) but now I am going to renovate my loft and plan on adding a nice theater area. The piece of wall I am going to use for the screen is 13 feet across (although the actual room is much wider) and the room is 24 feet across. I plan to place seating about 12-14 feet from the screen (in the middle of the room) and use a 120" or 133" screen. I plan to use a Pearl projector and was originally going to ceiling mount it about 14' from the screen however the ceiling is 11'6" high and the screen wall has an outcropping near it's top which will force me to mount the screen about 1' bellow the ceiling. I'd like to use a motorized screen and was looking at the high power or maybe the EluneVision but it seems that in order to get a good angle for this retro-reflective screen I would need to use at least a 3 or 4 foot pole on the ceiling mount to bring the projector down to 7' or so above the floor (still about 4' about the 3' seating viewing height). This still might not be enough not too loose most of the HP's gain and would likely look rather stupid hanging down in the middle of the loft.
My other thought is to mount the projector of some shelves I am putting on the wall which faces the screen wall. This would put the projector 24' away from the screen, but I could choose the height based on which shelf I put it on, any where from about 7' to 4' above the ground. I figure with the long throw I'd likely have to put it up around 7' to avoid getting the heads on the viewers in the projector beam. Does this logic work, or am I missing something? Maybe the HP isn't a good screen for my set up? Thoughts?

Sean