Sim2 HT5000 - Page 9

I have a room behind the theater for the projector so the throw will be about 27' to 28' through a port hole.

Art

Congrats Art. Love the screen. What is the retail on that monster.

If you are looking for porthole glass this is the guy odyssey uses.

https://www.us.schott.com/architectu...6810cc1ecd03a2

Thanks Peter ! I believe it's 25K

Art

Just caught up with this thread, and wow, this is really fun to read. Congratulations, Art, on making the leap to the not-so-dark side This seems like a hot time to be looking at new projectors. Projectors like the HT5000's high-end predecessors were the reason I got sucked into this $20K forum!

Art,

Did you consider going with a 2.37:1 aspect ratio screen before deciding on the 2.40:1?

There is a possibility of seeing small black bars on the screen because the lens has a fixed stretch factor and since you don't have 4 way masking with your screen you may see greyish bars (as the Sim2's CR will be a shade over 6000:1) on the screen with some movies (that are accurately mastered in true 2.40:1).

Haroon
I tested that during the week and the PJ has fine enough AR control and memories (18 programmable and 6 preset aspect ratios per input) for that not to be an issue.

Do they have the Vista Scope in a Sam Runco Kitchen version? 2.76

With Mutiny on the bounty, Battle of the Bulge and Ben Hur I am tormented as to what the final aspect ratio should be in a system like Art's.

Imagine the battle of the bulge in all it's glory....

Thanks for the info. I didn't know that.

The Vistascope comes 2.40:1 which should reduce the bars to only those few films like Peter mentioned which are wider ARs than that (2.55:1 and 2.76:1). There are very very few of these films as you know.

Art

Art,

Do you think the HT5000 is too bright for smaller screens, say in the 10' range?

Jim

Haroon,

In addition to the answers already given the Stewart screen has infinitely adjustable masking, from 2.40 down to 1.33. I am not sure why you think he would see bars in movies mastered at "true 2.40". Art would never see bars for anything 2:40 or less, only for material greater than 2.40. Which is a very small number of films, probably something like 50 movies total.

I just think that there are some fine units that canlight up that screen size other than the 5000. Each has advantages. It's just for larger screens the options are few.

Art

It depends on your throw distance. I'm putting a user review up this weekend and you will see that the lens options give a throw ratio from roughly 0.7 all the way to roughly 7. The lamp can also be dimmed or if you choose a 2 lamp model they can be dimmed and/or run singly. I would imagine that 10ft may be an issue in a smaller room. and you'd end up needing welding goggles

I think he got his ARs mixed up. I did notice that certain TV channels have some edge issues as does my 360 and the odd dvd. The fine control on the AR memories allow these to be removed easily and a memory given a suitable name if needed. I have them macroed into my remote so its automated now. The 5k will give 3 settings for each of the 6 memories per input. There is 1 overscan for each of the six memories per input if needed.

Jiglaw,
I find my Qualia with ISCO III with 1200 hours on the bulb too bright at full open IRIS on a 12 foot wide Cinecurve Micro perf Grey hawk Stewart 2:35 Screen with auotomatic AR.
I use it with medium IRIS position.
I find a too bright image annoying and would be carefull buying a very bright projector for a 10 foot wide screen.
Ash

You can always use a filter if the projector you want happens to be brighter than you need. A person might want state of the art but just not be able to accommodate a huge screen. So put a good filter in front of it to reduce the brightness level to the desired setting.

QQQ, have to agree there. I've seen excellent results with a good quality filter. The best i saw was an optical filter used as porthole glass.

So what would be the consensus for near optimal screen size for 16:9, and or 2.40:1.

Also what distance would be the sweet spot from the above, 1 X screen width?

Lastly for a room 18 x 18 do you think 14' wide 2:40 would work?

14ft scoped is 10.5ft @ 16:9. This gives a 15ft and 21ft min distances for full 1080 detail (rough figures). By the time you get an HT5k in that room the space may mean your front row would have too wide a viewing angle. You'll also need fairly high ceilings too, probably 10ft at least.
Dont forget part of the room will also be eaten up by the screen (masking screens have a depth component too) and at that width you probably will be looking at having speakers, or at least the centre, behind the screen. Rear access may also be an issue. Even if you are mounting the 5k at the rear wall, by the time you allow for rear cable access the lens will be at least 4ft from the wall, you may well be down to around 11ft clearance between lens an screen.

For me, optimal sizes are max possible given your real estate consideration.

Art, coldmachine, Ash and QQQ,

Thanks for the comments.

Jim

Access issues can be mitigated.

My screen is about 12" from the front wall, essentially the depth of the speakers plus an inch or two extra. The entire screen, masks, motors etc, are mounted on a retractable frame - if I need to get behind the screen I can pull the entire 15' wide screen about 4' away from the wall for easy access...

For projectors it's often possible to put them in another room and port through the wall, retaining all the original room space.

Mark

This is true and allows one to simply take off the filter as the lamp ages.

Art

Mark

I'm using a ported projection/ equipment room and rear screen access.
My answer was given as food for thought to LJG regarding a very large screen in a single room of 18ft. More of a worst case scenario to illustrate the attendant issues of a larger screen. Your solution does sound very elegant.

Hi

I do not mean to hijaclk the thread but this bear another question. What do you really gain? I will repeat that I am just getting in really High End video and I have a lot to learn but on paper it looks like some lower priced PJ are as good or even better than these on a small screen... So why would one purchase a PJ which is meant for big screen only to reduce its light output to match a screen a screen that would be lighted adequately and some would say better by a less expensive PJ?


If that is OT , I apologize in advance and stand ready to delete the post...

LJG,
My room is 18 feet wide and 27 feet deep - Projector ported through the lobby.
The maximum we would fit was a 12 foot wide - I proposed 13 but was told it is not a good idea (http://gallery.avsforum.com/showgall...ser/273/sort/2).
The irony of the whole thing is that one the theater was built I prefer sitting in the back row - the front row screen size is too much for my preference.
Ash

Not hijacking, you are correct IMO.

Art

At the moment there really is no cheap alternative to a 3 chip DLP. I personally have not seen a PJ that produces an image like the 5k. I own a D80 and HT3k and consider these to be outstanding in thier price range but they fall a bit short of an HT5k. The only machines with the onboard processing quality of the 5k are the other Sims....period. High end VPs are redundant from D80 up. Also itro 800 ANSI CR is hard to argue with.

Also you may have missed the fact that the 5k can be configured in dual lamp mode individually selectable and dimmable and in combination with a filter this allows constant light otput over a very large part of the lamp life. It can also throw a far larger image than we are talking about here. A dual lamper on 14ft will need to be dimmed unless its at super long throw. Long throw is another reason you may need one of these on a smaller screen, lens options range from 0.7 all the way up to 7 throw ratios.

There are however many fantastic solution for the smaller screen. I use 2 of them (one dimmed) and they still have much of the stellar image of the 5k, just without the 3 chipper WOW. The new "e" models are even better

I think on this thread "smaller" probably still means 10ft.

The fact remains that with a calibrated 1080 panel with the pixels properly addressed you are almost sure to have a fantastic picture.

No apology needed at all.

Frantz,

Most higher end projectors have features and performance that less expensive units don't. To list only a few, these may include much better lenses, more sophisticated color management, constant light output, precise motorized lens movements, higher bit depth image processing, and custom gamma curves.

The best ways to decrease light output are through methods that also increase performance or lamp life. Smaller apertures and decreased lamp current are in this category. Another less known method is to defocus the lamp. This can lower the light output by up to 75% and increases the uniformity. This is an easy adjustment for the d-cinema models and probably much harder or not possible for others.

All the jokes about sunglasses notwithstanding, most of the 3 chip DLPs intended for this market have barely enough light output after precise D65 calibration and normal lamp aging.

How true, hence the dual lamp option. Many PJs list lamp life in 1000s of hours, the 5k lists at 1500, and we all know it wont get near that. Its the nature of the beast at the moment.

Hi Frantz,

I am surprised by Art's answer because I would assume he is purchasing the Sim not only because it has more brightness than the JVC RS1, but because he thinks it is better in other areas as well. Regardless, the answer to your question is that you are correct and there would be no reason to spend the extra money UNLESS the brighter projector also did other things better that the less expensive projectors cannot do, as odyssey alluded to.

Regarding decreasing light output, I will defer to odyssey, though I believe some of the methods he mentions are not going to be available on "regular" non cinema models.