or Connect
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 111

post #3301 of 3769
Okay, my pressing need to make a snap decision on the HP screen has gone. The buyer withdrew it from sale. Nevertheless, I still think it may be the way to go forward. If I can repeat what I said before and ask for your advice. I projector from 11ft on to a 1.0 gain matt white screen - 110" diag - with my JVC HD750. The room is a bat cave (black everywhere including black felt on ceiling and black curtains at either side of screen. With 650 hours used on my 750 there are times when I'd like more lumens without using High lamp mode. I'd also like a bit more punch and pop in the picture - and if the High Power screen can help with impressions of sharpness that would be great. My seating is all within the width of the screen. Projector is currently ceiling mounted with at least a 6" drop due to mount. I'd say the ceiling is 8ft high (haven't measured this) and the top of the screen is about 6" from the ceiling - so the pj lens is adjacent to top of the screen. Our seating eye level is obvious a few feet below this. Is there a way of working out what brightness gain I'd get from using the High Power? Do you think it will do what I want? Punch, pop, sharpness? I'm looking at getting one of the manual B screens and cutting out the fabric and then placing this on my home made wooden frame. This seems to be the most cost effective method. Have others done this too?

I appreciate your advice.
post #3302 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canary_Jules View Post

Okay, my pressing need to make a snap decision on the HP screen has gone. The buyer withdrew it from sale. Nevertheless, I still think it may be the way to go forward. If I can repeat what I said before and ask for your advice. I projector from 11ft on to a 1.0 gain matt white screen - 110" diag - with my JVC HD750. The room is a bat cave (black everywhere including black felt on ceiling and black curtains at either side of screen. With 650 hours used on my 750 there are times when I'd like more lumens without using High lamp mode. I'd also like a bit more punch and pop in the picture - and if the High Power screen can help with impressions of sharpness that would be great. My seating is all within the width of the screen. Projector is currently ceiling mounted with at least a 6" drop due to mount. I'd say the ceiling is 8ft high (haven't measured this) and the top of the screen is about 6" from the ceiling - so the pj lens is adjacent to top of the screen. Our seating eye level is obvious a few feet below this. Is there a way of working out what brightness gain I'd get from using the High Power? Do you think it will do what I want? Punch, pop, sharpness? I'm looking at getting one of the manual B screens and cutting out the fabric and then placing this on my home made wooden frame. This seems to be the most cost effective method. Have others done this too?

I appreciate your advice.

Here's what you're looking for.
post #3303 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canary_Jules View Post

Okay, my pressing need to make a snap decision on the HP screen has gone. The buyer withdrew it from sale. Nevertheless, I still think it may be the way to go forward. If I can repeat what I said before and ask for your advice. I projector from 11ft on to a 1.0 gain matt white screen - 110" diag - with my JVC HD750. The room is a bat cave (black everywhere including black felt on ceiling and black curtains at either side of screen. With 650 hours used on my 750 there are times when I'd like more lumens without using High lamp mode. I'd also like a bit more punch and pop in the picture - and if the High Power screen can help with impressions of sharpness that would be great. My seating is all within the width of the screen. Projector is currently ceiling mounted with at least a 6" drop due to mount. I'd say the ceiling is 8ft high (haven't measured this) and the top of the screen is about 6" from the ceiling - so the pj lens is adjacent to top of the screen. Our seating eye level is obvious a few feet below this. Is there a way of working out what brightness gain I'd get from using the High Power? Do you think it will do what I want? Punch, pop, sharpness? I'm looking at getting one of the manual B screens and cutting out the fabric and then placing this on my home made wooden frame. This seems to be the most cost effective method. Have others done this too?

I appreciate your advice.

ceiling mount is going to give you about .8 or 1 gain. You should read the first post of this thread to understand how the HP work and what it's drawbacks are.
post #3304 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canary_Jules View Post

Okay, my pressing need to make a snap decision on the HP screen has gone. The buyer withdrew it from sale. Nevertheless, I still think it may be the way to go forward. If I can repeat what I said before and ask for your advice. I projector from 11ft on to a 1.0 gain matt white screen - 110" diag - with my JVC HD750. The room is a bat cave (black everywhere including black felt on ceiling and black curtains at either side of screen. With 650 hours used on my 750 there are times when I'd like more lumens without using High lamp mode. I'd also like a bit more punch and pop in the picture - and if the High Power screen can help with impressions of sharpness that would be great. My seating is all within the width of the screen. Projector is currently ceiling mounted with at least a 6" drop due to mount. I'd say the ceiling is 8ft high (haven't measured this) and the top of the screen is about 6" from the ceiling - so the pj lens is adjacent to top of the screen. Our seating eye level is obvious a few feet below this. Is there a way of working out what brightness gain I'd get from using the High Power? Do you think it will do what I want? Punch, pop, sharpness? I'm looking at getting one of the manual B screens and cutting out the fabric and then placing this on my home made wooden frame. This seems to be the most cost effective method. Have others done this too?

I appreciate your advice.


I've seen the JVC HD750 on a neutral gain screen and the directly compared it on an HP screen, in a true "bat cave" (all black velvet). By significantly raising the brightness of the image the HP definitely gave the image more vividness, "pop" and apparent contrast and added sharpness. All those things tend to go up when you brighten an image. It was a real "wow" difference.

Be aware that if you use the HP screen to raise your brightness you will in all likelihood also be raising your black levels. Most people don't seem to care but if you are really into great black levels you might consider this issue.

That said, if you like the brightness of a bulb-on-high image, then playing with placement of your projector/screen angle and also with your JVC's iris control, you can probably end up with an image similar to high bulb on your neutral gain screen, but with the iris dialed down a lot more than you have it now. In other words, you'll have a lot of head room for opening the iris as your bulb ages.

BTW, I have the same projector (RS20) and I found myself starting to be dissatisfied with the brightness as it was nearing 500 hours. In that way I really envy HP screen owners. Unfortunately since I have a hard time with the HP's viewing cone I didn't see it as an option so instead I've just bought a new bulb (I have Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain white screen).
post #3305 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

BTW, I have the same projector (RS20) and I found myself starting to be dissatisfied with the brightness as it was nearing 500 hours. In that way I really envy HP screen owners. Unfortunately since I have a hard time with the HP's viewing cone I didn't see it as an option so instead I've just bought a new bulb (I have Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain white screen).

Wow, suprised the bulb dimmed that much at 500 hours. Anyone know how long people with 106" HP screens usually get out of JVC bulbs, on average I mean?
Like 1000-1500 is my guess?
post #3306 of 3769
Thanks all for the replies. Very helpful.

I put my data into the gain calculator (thanks for the link) and it tells me:

RETRO REFLECTIVE
SCREEN SCREEN SCREEN
LEFT CENTER RIGHT
Calculated Error Angle (Degrees): 14.70 15.58 14.70
Estimated Screen Gain: 1.91 1.88 1.91

Strange that it's giving me higher can outside the centre position. Still, looks like a nice increase in brightness overall.
post #3307 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

I've seen the JVC HD750 on a neutral gain screen and the directly compared it on an HP screen, in a true "bat cave" (all black velvet). By significantly raising the brightness of the image the HP definitely gave the image more vividness, "pop" and apparent contrast and added sharpness. All those things tend to go up when you brighten an image. It was a real "wow" difference.

Be aware that if you use the HP screen to raise your brightness you will in all likelihood also be raising your black levels. Most people don't seem to care but if you are really into great black levels you might consider this issue.

That said, if you like the brightness of a bulb-on-high image, then playing with placement of your projector/screen angle and also with your JVC's iris control, you can probably end up with an image similar to high bulb on your neutral gain screen, but with the iris dialed down a lot more than you have it now. In other words, you'll have a lot of head room for opening the iris as your bulb ages.

BTW, I have the same projector (RS20) and I found myself starting to be dissatisfied with the brightness as it was nearing 500 hours. In that way I really envy HP screen owners. Unfortunately since I have a hard time with the HP's viewing cone I didn't see it as an option so instead I've just bought a new bulb (I have Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain white screen).

Really appreciate your feedback. The dilemma I have is this. I really like my HD750. However, I come from a DLP background and I periodically get it into my head as I watch my HD750 that I wish it were brighter, sharper and had more 'pop'. This neurosis sometimes makes just watching and enjoying a film difficult as I'm constantly analysing the picture. Recently I happened to open my iris up to 0 and switch to high lamp power as an experiment and I was wowed. It seems the brighter picture just pleased me more. I could just sell my HD750 and go and buy an Optoma HD87. That would probably cost me £500-600. Or I could swap out my screen for a High Power and hope that it will satisfy my cravings. I want slightly sharper, brighter, more punch than I currently see but without a dynamic iris. So it's go High Power and stay JVC HD750 or go Optoma HD87. Either way I'm going to have to slightly reduce my screen size because the largest Da-Lite Model B High Power is 106" diag, and the HD87 doesn't have the zoom required to match my present 100" screen size. If you have any thoughts I'd appreciate them again. I guess I need to demo both. I have a 6" square sample of High Power screen material coming but I'm not sure that's going to tell me much about the capabilities of the HP screen.
post #3308 of 3769
As I've posted previously I have a Maxwhite Elite 150" screen and am going to order my 2.4 DaLite on Monday at 159". My question is this. I can only look at a 12 x 12 sample sent to me by DaLite. What a difference, what was light gray on my older screen (which I thought was white) looks like real bright white on the 2.4 gain.

But how does this look on all parts of the screen if you are in the center? Obviously, 159" is huge, and it will go pretty far to the left and right of me. How will that look on the sides when the brightest area is in the center? I sit 12 feet back from the screen, projector (JVC RS50) is on a dresser behind the seating area 14.4 feet from screen about 1 l/2 feet above eye level.
post #3309 of 3769
Cancary_Jones,

I switched from a 92 HCCV to a 106 HP, using a JV RS1 w/ 550 hours, the picture now looks more plasma like. My wife cannot deal w/ DLP's RBE. I still use my Infocus IN76 as a backup for regular TV fare when watching alone.

Prior to the change in screen, the picture looked dim in low lamp mode, considering only 550 hours. It's the cheapest investment in home theater for me. Wished I had done this earlier (got the HCCV since 2002). It's so bright that I adjusted the brightness by 2 notches. My current room and pj can easily accommodate a 120" screen but looking to downsize to a smaller house, so 106" is a reasonable compromise.
post #3310 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post

How is that screen mounted? I thought it was a pulldown but I don't see a housing. I can't make it out.

It's not "mounted" at all. It is a gatorfoam board that is sitting on a couple of bookend-style holders that I fabricated (look closely at the left & right top shelf of the rack), and held at the top to keep it from falling-forward. I put it-up and take it down as needed, setting it alongside the wall on the left. Note gatorfoam, even at my 1/2" thickness, is very stiff yet light in weight i.e. I wouldn't try this with an MDF or plywood or even drywall.

I don't even need the cat to help me get it up and down!

post #3311 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by mntwister View Post

As I've posted previously I have a Maxwhite Elite 150" screen and am going to order my 2.4 DaLite on Monday at 159". My question is this. I can only look at a 12 x 12 sample sent to me by DaLite. What a difference, what was light gray on my older screen (which I thought was white) looks like real bright white on the 2.4 gain.

But how does this look on all parts of the screen if you are in the center? Obviously, 159" is huge, and it will go pretty far to the left and right of me. How will that look on the sides when the brightest area is in the center? I sit 12 feet back from the screen, projector (JVC RS50) is on a dresser behind the seating area 14.4 feet from screen about 1 l/2 feet above eye level.

Not to worry. Retroreflective screens have great brightness uniformity--far better than angular reflective gain screens. In fact, when the PJ is slightly above seated eye level (as yours seems to be), the left and right sides of the screen will often have slightly higher gain than the center, thereby helping compensate for any drop in edge brightness caused by the PJ itself. Stick your parameters into my screen gain calculator linked below to see what I mean.
post #3312 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonbud0 View Post

Cancary_Jones,

I switched from a 92 HCCV to a 106 HP, using a JV RS1 w/ 550 hours, the picture now looks more plasma like. My wife cannot deal w/ DLP's RBE. I still use my Infocus IN76 as a backup for regular TV fare when watching alone.

Prior to the change in screen, the picture looked dim in low lamp mode, considering only 550 hours. It's the cheapest investment in home theater for me. Wished I had done this earlier (got the HCCV since 2002). It's so bright that I adjusted the brightness by 2 notches. My current room and pj can easily accommodate a 120" screen but looking to downsize to a smaller house, so 106" is a reasonable compromise.

Thanks for sharing your experience.
post #3313 of 3769
Can anyone comment about the effect of the HP screen on apparent sharpness of the image. I read a review over at Projector Central which criticised the HP screen to the effect that it would be great with 720p but not 1080p!!
post #3314 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canary_Jules View Post

Can anyone comment about the effect of the HP screen on apparent sharpness of the image. I read a review over at Projector Central which criticised the HP screen to the effect that it would be great with 720p but not 1080p!!

Do a search of this thread with the words Projector Central review and read what has been said.
post #3315 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canary_Jules View Post

Really appreciate your feedback. The dilemma I have is this. I really like my HD750. However, I come from a DLP background and I periodically get it into my head as I watch my HD750 that I wish it were brighter, sharper and had more 'pop'. This neurosis sometimes makes just watching and enjoying a film difficult as I'm constantly analysing the picture. Recently I happened to open my iris up to 0 and switch to high lamp power as an experiment and I was wowed. It seems the brighter picture just pleased me more. I could just sell my HD750 and go and buy an Optoma HD87. That would probably cost me £500-600. Or I could swap out my screen for a High Power and hope that it will satisfy my cravings. I want slightly sharper, brighter, more punch than I currently see but without a dynamic iris. So it's go High Power and stay JVC HD750 or go Optoma HD87. Either way I'm going to have to slightly reduce my screen size because the largest Da-Lite Model B High Power is 106" diag, and the HD87 doesn't have the zoom required to match my present 100" screen size. If you have any thoughts I'd appreciate them again. I guess I need to demo both. I have a 6" square sample of High Power screen material coming but I'm not sure that's going to tell me much about the capabilities of the HP screen.

I have the HP 2.8 gain screen (full screen) which I've tested against another white screen and a Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain screen. I chose the Stewart screen ultimately because it had better viewing angles for my home theater.

The HP will give you what you say you are craving. I even started testing the HP vs a neutral gain white screen with an old Panasonic AE900 720p LCD projector - hardly known for a high contrast image. But even playing that thing on the HP made it look "WOW" on bright scenes, like a DLP projector.

When I was at another forum member's place we viewed some of King Kong (Jackson's) in HD on a neutral gain screen then his HP screen and it was a "holy sh@t" experience. Everything about the image just got elevated - image punch, pop, color detail, image detail, apparent sharpness you name it. It was like "super-HD."

As I said, it's a scientifically established fact that increasing contrast and (within certain parameters) increasing brightness makes images appear sharper and clearer to us. Just try dialing the brightness way down then up on your computer screen and you should see this effect. And after all isn't that also what you see when you go from a dim image to using high bulb and opening up your iris on your JVC projector?

If you look up super close at the pixel structure of an image on the HP you'll see the surface has a bit of a glaze and the pixel structure may not be as super sharp as possible (but still very good). But it's what you see from the viewing seat that counts. From that seat I find the much brighter image will add a sharpness effect to my perception that outdoes pretty much any screen I've seen (except maybe my Stewart screen).
post #3316 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

If you look up super close at the pixel structure of an image on the HP you'll see the surface has a bit of a glaze and the pixel structure may not be as super sharp as possible (but still very good).

When you mention a "glaze" appearance I assume that you're referring to the HP 2.8. I saw the same thing on my 2.8 sample. I don't see that characteristic on my 2.4 however. When I look at the 2.4 up close every pixel and the interpixel gap is clearly defined. To my eye the image on an HP 2.4 is just as sharp as a matte white.
post #3317 of 3769
Do you get that "film" like look with the HP 2.4 and HP 2.8? What concerns me is that the comments are that you get this "pop" on the image and I immediately start thinking of a plasma like image. I'm lokking for that smooth film like image. If the brightness was lowered by a lower lamp mode or higher projector mounting would that increase the smoothness or maybe it's smooth already and I am overly concerned for no reason.......hopefully!

How does it compare to the ST-130 in this regard?

Thanks,
Greg
post #3318 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregory View Post

Do you get that "film" like look with the HP 2.4 and HP 2.8? What concerns me is that the comments are that you get this "pop" on the image and I immediately start thinking of a plasma like image. I'm lokking for that smooth film like image. If the brightness was lowered by a lower lamp mode or higher projector mounting would that increase the smoothness or maybe it's smooth already and I am overly concerned for no reason.......hopefully!

How does it compare to the ST-130 in this regard?

Thanks,
Greg

I don't think it's so much a screen issue as a brightness issue. Traditionally the projected film images we've seen in theaters is nowhere near as bright as a flat screen. Once you start seriously raising brightness beyond movie theater standards then it's not suprising many start percieving the image as being more flat-screen-like vs film/theater-like.

You just have to decide what you like.

I was able to place an HP screen and my projector at just the right angles to get pretty much all the gain of the HP, so I could have a really bright image. I definitely found this had the effect of making movies look more flat screen like, more video-like. It was neat but a bit off-putting for movies at least on my big screen. I tend to like a sort of in-between look. In between a neutral gain and an HP 2.8 gain.

If you have some flexibility with your projector height/screen height you can play with the angles to get the brightness you desire (to some degree). Even better is having a projector with a user adjustable iris, like the JVCs, which you can further dial to your taste.

I have the ST-130 and it is a gorgeous screen. But I also vary my screen size sometimes up to 120" wide, in which case I like to put my JVC proj. into high bulb mode. It would be nice to have a bit more headroom, a bit more gain, but so far I haven't seen a screen with more gain that didn't have issues for me.

I'm sort of caught between two desires: the desire for deeper black levels and the desire for higher brightness, and the two seem opposed at this time in projector technology. Deeper black levels give an more realistic, richer and more satisfying solidity to darker scenes, and higher brightness does the same for brighter scenes. I wish I could have both, but my set up with an ST-130 gives me the best compromise between the two that I could find.
post #3319 of 3769
Maybe possible to get both punchier on both sides of the spectrum if someone invents a better dynamic IRIS and adds it to a JVC-like projector, then you'd have a huge enough range. To me though JVC is smart in avoiding a dynamic IRIS for now, because the technology is kind of gimpy. Never seen the Sony IRIS's at work though as they could do this somewhat, but Native On/Off will still beat it of course and the Sony's are behind in Native.

Sometimes I feel that dynamic IRIS actually improves the fact that you get a punchier image in brighter scenes and a darker image in darker scenes, but at least half the time I feel the IRIS went the wrong way or didn't do anything. That is one thing that might be interesting on the new Epsons, if the IRIS's work better and the fact that the new Epson LCOS have contrast a lot closer to JVC's but also have an IRIS. It seems that current IRIS technology doesn't really know what to do or at what brightness level to adjust to for a given scene. Some scenes IRIS's get it right, but too often they go too far or do too little given a particular scene.
post #3320 of 3769
Quote:


I'm sort of caught between two desires: the desire for deeper black levels and the desire for higher brightness, and the two seem opposed at this time in projector technology. Deeper black levels give an more realistic, richer and more satisfying solidity to darker scenes, and higher brightness does the same for brighter scenes. I wish I could have both, but my set up with an ST-130 gives me the best compromise between the two that I could find.

I thought about what you said last night as I watched a movie - Winter in Wartime (very recommended btw!). I opened up the iris and put the JVC into high lamp mode. Lumens on the screen were greatly increased. It's a movie with a lot of white in it due to the snow. I know this is with the caveat that opening the iris and using high lamp changes the colour space etc, but, to be honest, when I thought about the picture I actually preferred the original image. The blacks were much deeper for a start and this looked better against the white background. It was a film that just didn't benefit from looking like a plasma. It looked cinematic. I think there are probably films like this which benefit from the cinematic look. Others, however, - perhaps especially HDTV - may benefit from more lumens etc - the plasma look. In which case the ability of a screen and projector combo to be able to adapt is a great advantage. Perhaps the High Power will allow this.
post #3321 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

I don't think it's so much a screen issue as a brightness issue. Traditionally the projected film images we've seen in theaters is nowhere near as bright as a flat screen. Once you start seriously raising brightness beyond movie theater standards then it's not suprising many start percieving the image as being more flat-screen-like vs film/theater-like.

You just have to decide what you like.

I was able to place an HP screen and my projector at just the right angles to get pretty much all the gain of the HP, so I could have a really bright image. I definitely found this had the effect of making movies look more flat screen like, more video-like. It was neat but a bit off-putting for movies at least on my big screen. I tend to like a sort of in-between look. In between a neutral gain and an HP 2.8 gain.

If you have some flexibility with your projector height/screen height you can play with the angles to get the brightness you desire (to some degree). Even better is having a projector with a user adjustable iris, like the JVCs, which you can further dial to your taste.

I have the ST-130 and it is a gorgeous screen. But I also vary my screen size sometimes up to 120" wide, in which case I like to put my JVC proj. into high bulb mode. It would be nice to have a bit more headroom, a bit more gain, but so far I haven't seen a screen with more gain that didn't have issues for me.

I'm sort of caught between two desires: the desire for deeper black levels and the desire for higher brightness, and the two seem opposed at this time in projector technology. Deeper black levels give an more realistic, richer and more satisfying solidity to darker scenes, and higher brightness does the same for brighter scenes. I wish I could have both, but my set up with an ST-130 gives me the best compromise between the two that I could find.

Rich, thanks for the reply.

So, it sounds like you are really saying is that the increased brightness and not some other attribute of the HP screen could lean towards a more video like look. Given screen size (125" diag. 2.35 AR), picture/lamp mode and projector mounting height I can potentially acheive a low enough foot-lamberts coming off the screen to emulate a theater like look, which is my goal. I can also change these to achieve more brightness as the lamp ages or if I end up desiring a brighter image.

It would also appear that if you really hit the ST-130 with a lot of lumens that image too, would tend towards more video like.

I think what I'm trying to say is that it's really just brightness no matter how you get there (raw lumens, gain, screen size, etc.).

Would you agree with this?

How's the sparklies with the ST-130? Forgive me if I asked this question before........I don't remember.

Thanks,
Greg
post #3322 of 3769
My sister gave me her manual pulldown Da-Lite 77" HDTV screen that she bought a couple of years ago, but she cannot remember what type of screen it was. She said it was the best they had so I am hoping it is a high power screen. Is there a way to tell what kind of screen it is? I cannot find any serial number or screen type on the screen anywhere. Just the Da-Lite name. Thanks.
post #3323 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbolt View Post

My sister gave me her manual pulldown Da-Lite 77" HDTV screen that she bought a couple of years ago, but she cannot remember what type of screen it was. She said it was the best they had so I am hoping it is a high power screen. Is there a way to tell what kind of screen it is? I cannot find any serial number or screen type on the screen anywhere. Just the Da-Lite name. Thanks.

One clue to it being an HP screen is the weight of the fabric. It's quite heavy compared to other screens.
post #3324 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbolt View Post

My sister gave me her manual pulldown Da-Lite 77" HDTV screen that she bought a couple of years ago, but she cannot remember what type of screen it was. She said it was the best they had so I am hoping it is a high power screen. Is there a way to tell what kind of screen it is? I cannot find any serial number or screen type on the screen anywhere. Just the Da-Lite name. Thanks.

Read this, http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post17854754 and follow the link a the end of the first post. There are pictures with written comments (click the thumbnails, comments under full size photos). This thread is about the differences between the 2.8 and 2.4 HP but if it is a few years old and is HP it will probably be 2.8.
Good luck
post #3325 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregory View Post


I think what I'm trying to say is that it's really just brightness no matter how you get there (raw lumens, gain, screen size, etc.).

Would you agree with this?


Yes. A while back a friend and I put up various projectors against a Pioneer plasma. We zoomed down the images to plasma size (50" diag) which of course greatly increased the brightness of the image. The images certainly became much more plasma-like and if someone didn't know it was a projection I'd bet they'd assume they were watching a plasma or LCD.

BTW, minor note: To be really picky I'd say the small projected images were still distinguished from a plasma image even though they were pretty much as bright and just about as sharp. They looked more like a bright rear projector image. I still find there is something of a signature to a projection-technology image vs the signature of a plasma image, which I put down to the difference between light reflected off a surface (projection) vs directly emitted light (plasma).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregory View Post

How's the sparklies with the ST-130?

They are there but very subtle.

I hate sparklies but needed a bit of gain on my screen. The gain on the ST-130 was the most benign I could find. Most of the time the screen seems "invisible" but occasionally in brighter spots I can spot some sparklies. Luckily it's subtle enough that it goes back to "invisible" mode soon afterward while I'm watching.
post #3326 of 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

I still find there is something of a signature to a projection-technology image vs the signature of a plasma image, which I put down to the difference between light reflected off a surface (projection) vs directly emitted light (plasma).

Agreed, the light source seems to cause a bit of a video or "fake" look on a plasma, for lack of a better word, which causes it to look less natural. Perhaps it is also the screen itself which even the non-glossy Plasmas still have a bit of that glossed look. I remember some of the old Plasmas that had those excessively high gloss screens, those really looked unnatural.

To me it also appears that Plasmas exagerrate contrast sometimes, although it could just be because I have only seen very few pro-calibrated plasmas. Sometimes when I'm watching a Plasma image I think to myself, wow if I were viewing that scene in real life, no way would it look like that.

Of course I'll still take the Plasma contrasty pop video look over a projector if I had a choice, but it probably depends what I'm watching too.
post #3327 of 3769
coderguy,

We have precisely the opposite view of plasma. I find a well calibrated plasma image (and even a newer LCD image) to be the most realistic image to be found. I have a hunch that like a number of people you find flat screen images look "fake" due to typical calibration issues.

Long time members of the plasma forum remember me as being quite obsessed with the idea of image realism and how to achieve it. I constantly compared various technologies against real life. I also tried different calibration methods, not only ISF type but also "calibrated to life" methods. That is I would look at the video image, sometimes it was footage taken of someone in my family, and try to discern what was the obvious differences between them. Obviously pretty much any out of the box settings, especially the type we see in stores, will have too much contrast, color saturation, sharpness, brightness etc. But I'm not only talking of OOTB settings - in terms of sheer image realism even an ISF calibrated set will tend to look more saturated than life. And intense saturation tends to give the image an electronic glow.

By carefully adjusting the picture settings you can reduce these issues to a very sedate, extremely natural look.

As for the plasma glass in front of the image it's easy, at least for night viewing, for this to be a non-issue. I would just make sure there weren't lights shining on the screen. In fact for a cinematic effect I always preferred watching with lights fully off.
So any glass in front of the pixels completely disappears and all you have is the direct light coming to you. Since, unlike any form of projection, there is not surface on which the light is reflecting, there is no sense of a "mediated" image and hence that artifact is removed, and the image looks more believably "dense" and "there."

I've simply never seen images as realistic, so "reach out and touch it solid," as on my plasma after taking such care, and I've seen the best projection has to offer. Modern LCD displays have similar capabilities when properly handled. I've occasionally found LCDs that were actually well calibrated and which produced a realism that no projection I've seen could touch. I get it in glimpses in projection, but not nearly as consistently as from an excellent flat screen - not surprising as the ON/OFF contrast combined with ANSI contrast capabilities of current flat screens, while not yet at real life stage, far exceed what is possible in front projection.

But...I love a big image and I love the cinematic, romantic feel of projection, which is why I went that route for my home theater.
post #3328 of 3769
I think we are getting a bit Off Topic here guys.. HP screen thread...
post #3329 of 3769
I hear you, I guess it depends on the specific TV like anything else. I haven't really paid attention to many Plasmas lately. Also I don't think I've ever seen a Plasma in a true pure bat cave, so not a good judge.

Most realistic image I ever seen was IMAX on the better PJ's before they started replacing them with the cheaper ones.
post #3330 of 3769
well, my hp 2.4 has very little texture on it when viewing. I can't see anything on it from 10' back that is for sure.

As for the plasma comments. LCD's are getting better, but I have yet to see a LCD ,properly calibarated or not, touch a good plasma for "realistic" picture quality. And I've seen far too many cheap LCD's that were worse at screen reflection then some plasma's. It goes both ways. LCD tends to look over blown, over bright, over saturated etc. Great for cartoons I guess. That being said, my plasma(s) have their faults too.

I can't say I got any screen reflection issues with my HP though I am starting to appreciate it more now that my bulb is breaking in some. Given how @#$@#$ hard the snaps were too put on the frame...it ain't coming down any time soon that is for sure. I am very surprised that Da-Lite has not been sued for a serious injury given the nature of how the snaps go on their screens....holy #$$%
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Screens
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › HIGH POWER a Review! Part 1