or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › Black Diamond from Screen Innovations?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Black Diamond from Screen Innovations? - Page 107

post #3181 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post

I am planning to get the OPPO.. Didn't realize it had that feature!

My point is: just because a project doesn't have power zoom/lens, doesn't mean one has to dismiss getting a 2:35 screen.

Steve, excellent point!
post #3182 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post

Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?
I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)
My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.
Won't this work?

Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post

Steve, the Sony VPL-HW50ES and the Epson 5020UB don't have the vertical stretch modes to scale the image for Anamorphic Lens support. The Epson 6020 does.

You could always get an Oppo BD Player or an external VP to do the scaling.

The 5020 does not do the A-lens stretch, but the Sony HW50ES does do the A-lens stretch for 2D.
Reply
Reply
post #3183 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post

Bob, I have an email from Sony somewhere that says it doesn't. They told me one would have to step up to the VW95. If it does then that's great!

I think there's a lot of misinformation going around due to lack of crosstalk from engineers to marketing perhaps.

For instance, I was originally told by Panamoprh that the BenQ W7000 would support V-Stretch in 3D mode but it has since been verified it does not. This could be due to the updated firmware it received.

In no way am I blaming Panamorph as things could change from what was originally told to them and then specs change before product launch or firmware updates happen.

I think the confusion comes from how the question is asked. The Sony can do the vertical stretch for 2D, but can't do the vertical stretch for 3D.
Reply
Reply
post #3184 of 3550
Disclaimer: Im a newb

just got my screen yesterday: black diamond zero edge 110 inches 1.4 gain. I'm using abrand new sony hw50es 16ft away., mounted on a ceiling just above the top of the screen. I sit 13 ft away.

first thing I noticed about the screen when firing up my projector, is a hot-spot the size of a soccer ball at about the center of the screen. I wasn't looking for it, it just popped out at me. it is a little disappointing. Also, The screen looks good with my my recessed lighting on fully lit, however, daytime viewing was a little bit disappointing. Maybe I had high expectations? I don't know what to do. how do I combat this sparkling nuisance? please help me out here. Thanks in advance
post #3185 of 3550
I myself just got a zero edge 100 inch 1.4 gain with a Panasonic PT-AE8000, I sit about 15 ft away but the projector is about 13ft away from the screen. I find it to work perfectly with a well lit room but yeah the daytime viewing for me isn't the best but really depends on how much light you let in I found, I do have a lot of windows in my room though so it's probably just me. I'd think if your seeing a hotspot you'd need to move the projector back some or possibly reduce the output like mine has an eco mode which I haven't really used yet since brighter is better during the day.

You said your sitting 13ft away but is that how far the projector is away from the screen as well?
post #3186 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xzibit190 View Post

I myself just got a zero edge 100 inch 1.4 gain with a Panasonic PT-AE8000, I sit about 15 ft away but the projector is about 13ft away from the screen. I find it to work perfectly with a well lit room but yeah the daytime viewing for me isn't the best but really depends on how much light you let in I found, I do have a lot of windows in my room though so it's probably just me. I'd think if your seeing a hotspot you'd need to move the projector back some or possibly reduce the output like mine has an eco mode which I haven't really used yet since brighter is better during the day.

You said your sitting 13ft away but is that how far the projector is away from the screen as well?

SI screens work best reflecting indirect lighting. For example, if you have light sources on the ceiling and sidewalls (in both cases close to the screen). The more direct the light is to your screen the worst it will be; in fact, it will (with 1.4 gain) augment the light source just as if it were the light shooting off the projector.
As far as hot spotting, screens with high gains are prone to it (not just SI's). Your screen appears to have too much gain for your projector lumen output. I don't know much about your Sony projector (JVC guy), but it seems like it is way too bright for a 1.4 gain screen at the distance you have installed it for the size of your screen. As a rule of thumb, light reflected off the screen is combination of screen gain, screen size, projector distance and projector light output (lumen).
Yes, you can try setting the lamp mode to normal or eco mode (different names for different projector brands) or closing the iris if your projector has one. These two would be the more practical solutions. The more complex one would be to push your projector back a few feet (if you have the room and your cables reach). Also, have your projector calibrated, or get a DIY calibration disk at least. Adjusting to the proper brightness and contrast helps a lot.
Finally, if you discussed your setup with your AV dealer prior to buying your screen, I would call them up and complain about it. From your comments, it looks like a 0.8 gain should have been a better choice.
post #3187 of 3550
I also just got a zero edge 110" 1.4. I haven't hung it yet because I still need to finish paint and flooring. I am using an Epson 5020UB. Throw distance is about 15'6" and I'll be sitting about 12'. Maybe Blake can chime in if he sees this. I wonder if the material is tested for hot spots after manufacture and summarily rejected if it doesn't pass or if all hot-spotting is a result of a proj/screen combo and/or set-up anamoly?
post #3188 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinH View Post

I also just got a zero edge 110" 1.4. I haven't hung it yet because I still need to finish paint and flooring. I am using an Epson 5020UB. Throw distance is about 15'6" and I'll be sitting about 12'. Maybe Blake can chime in if he sees this. I wonder if the material is tested for hot spots after manufacture and summarily rejected if it doesn't pass or if all hot-spotting is a result of a proj/screen combo and/or set-up anamoly?

I doubt it is a manufacturing defect.
Your Epson is spec'ed out at 2400 lumens which is up there on brightness (Epson's are known for being nice and bright). I remember SI advertising one of their screens with a similar Epson (not sure which screen material nor Epson model) on a video they had on their website, so it should work OK. Now, the key will be at what throw distance.
Hopefully someone from SI will chime in and give us his opinion.
post #3189 of 3550
Thanks for the help guys. I mentioned that my projector lens is 16 ft away from the screen. I have maybe 3 ft left to push my projector back, so that may be my last resort. I'll try messing around with the projectors settings first. What self calibration disc do you guys recommend?. Overall though the screen looks solid, no dings, scratches, etc. I'm happy in that regard.
post #3190 of 3550
Good info here:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1470226/which-setup-disc-s-do-you-use
post #3191 of 3550
Isis, good call on the direct lighting on the screen. I have a standard sized window directly behind me coming from my kitchen. I decided to cover that up and that made the image a lot less washed out. thanks for that. I also have 3 big windows off to the side of the screen and that isn't as much of an issue as the window directly facing the screen.

Thanks for the link Xzibit, will check that out right now
post #3192 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by mblobster View Post

Thanks for the help guys. I mentioned that my projector lens is 16 ft away from the screen. I have maybe 3 ft left to push my projector back, so that may be my last resort. I'll try messing around with the projectors settings first. What self calibration disc do you guys recommend?. Overall though the screen looks solid, no dings, scratches, etc. I'm happy in that regard.

The minimum throw distance for your screen material is 1.2. With your 16' on a 96" wide (110" diag.) screen, your throw ratio is 2.0. Hot spotting should not be an issue. What mode are you using your projector in? Also you can't move your projector back 3'. You are already near the max long throw range of the projector. You can only move it back to 17'. The problem is something else.
Reply
Reply
post #3193 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post

There's a box frame but it's about 6" from the edge of the screen, bringing the screen 1.5" away fromt the wall. Is this the old G1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post

How do you know which screen I have? Has the BD .8 changed the last 2 years? How do I know if I have the newer or older?

would appreciate a response on this.

thanks
post #3194 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post

Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?
I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)
My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.
Won't this work?

I just ordered the Sony 50ES with an Prismasonic Anamorphic lens to use on a 2.35:1 Black Diamond 1.4 110" screen.
Are you saying the Sony 50ES is a bad fit for 2.35:1?

I also ordered a Cambridge Audio 751BD Universal Blu-ray Player.
post #3195 of 3550
just the opposite.. I thought it was a great fit.. But others were doubting if this combination would work.

I think the OPPO may be an important piece to display the movie properly and to move subtitles so they can be seen.

That being said, I have recently read some very interesting articles that Blu-ray limits the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens. (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436729/anamorphic-encoded-blu-rays-on-the-horizon)

I didn't know that. This alone has changed my mind to get a 2:35 screen with an anamorphic lens.

Getting a large 16:9 screen instead.

Also rethinking about BD. Reading about people having issues with "sheen." More importantly I have just had the opportunity to see a BD live - and was not impressed. It was being fed by the Sony 30es, and it did not make me want to purchase that screen. The colors seemed dull - which makes me wonder if something was wrong with the setup. Maybe it was a BD .8? That could explain it.

However since my walls are light, I do not think I have much choice but to go with the BD 1.4.

Let me know how that Sony/BD combo works for you!!
Edited by Steve Benkin - 5/20/13 at 12:45pm
post #3196 of 3550
Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.

1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.

2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.

People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.

My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.
post #3197 of 3550

There is a difference in screens but the room plays such a big role, the screen has to be for the right application.  Take for instance a basic white screen, say under $500 which is basically cheap vinyl.  A white screen with no coating or gain will get the best performance with no lights in an all black room, preferably covered in black velvet.  In these conditions you will see the difference between the basic white screens and the more expensive models.  And these are the conditions a white screen should be considered.  As the room conditions get worse (i.e color of walls, ambient lighting) the difference between these white screens will not be as great and the picture quality will suffer.  Now, if your room is relatively dark colored and you do the most of the viewing with the lights off getting a better screen would be a good improvement.  Now, if your conditions aren't great I wouldn't recommend these white screens but if you plan to use one anyway then don't spend the extra for a high end one.

 

The high contrast screens work by helping contrast and adding a gain coating to reflect more of the light towards the audience and not scatter it everywhere.  To help with contrast we start with a gray screen, making the blacks darker gives us better perceived contrast even if the whites get reduced as well.  Then a coating for gain is applied.  Even if a screen is a negative gain, it might have a gain coating applied.  For example the BD .8 is a very dark screen and is probably a .5 or less gray screen with a coating to bring it to .8, the 2.7 is a whiter screen with a gain coating applied.  How dark of a base screen, uniformity of the base screen, how much gain is added, uniformity of gain applied, direction of gain (some do better with overhead lighting, some better from the sides, etc.) all play a part in the design decisions when manufacturing a screen.  The better screens have pretty involved processes and cost more.

 

Once a coating is applied you are bending light and some artifacts will be introduced and viewing angle will be reduced if you are reflecting more light back to the viewers.  There is no free lunch with light and physics.  The question is how noticeable are the artifacts and does the positive attributes outweigh the tradeoffs.  No one is going to recommend one of these high contrast gain screens for a screen in a reference "bat cave" type environment.  It will be easier to notice these artifacts in a reference environment but that is not the application these screens were intended.

 

Many of use our projection systems in a variety of conditions and we have to decide which attributes are most important to us and what tradeoffs we are willing to live with.  No screen is perfect for all situations.  One has to decide which screen is best for their situation.

post #3198 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by howletus View Post

Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.

1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.

2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.

People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.

My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.

Now that 80 - 90 inch Sharp LCD's are coming down in price, it seems that it may be better to get one of those for daytime viewing and then just get a white, drop down screen for night viewing. In that way, you essentially get the best of both worlds, and the savings on the plain white screen can help fund the purchase of the LCD. With the LCD option, you give up some size, but you still get a very respectable sized image for daytime that is likely much better at ambient light than a light-rejecting screen, and at night you also get a better image as well.

When LCD's & Plasma's were very expensive (or not widely available) in sizes above 60", then something like the Black Diamond or DNP made a lot of sense. Now it seems that the time has past for those types of screens since larger flat planels are now available.
post #3199 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobL View Post

There is a difference in screens but the room plays such a big role, the screen has to be for the right application.  Take for instance a basic white screen, say under $500 which is basically cheap vinyl.  A white screen with no coating or gain will get the best performance with no lights in an all black room, preferably covered in black velvet.  In these conditions you will see the difference between the basic white screens and the more expensive models.  And these are the conditions a white screen should be considered.  As the room conditions get worse (i.e color of walls, ambient lighting) the difference between these white screens will not be as great and the picture quality will suffer.  Now, if your room is relatively dark colored and you do the most of the viewing with the lights off getting a better screen would be a good improvement.  Now, if your conditions aren't great I wouldn't recommend these white screens but if you plan to use one anyway then don't spend the extra for a high end one.

The high contrast screens work by helping contrast and adding a gain coating to reflect more of the light towards the audience and not scatter it everywhere.  To help with contrast we start with a gray screen, making the blacks darker gives us better perceived contrast even if the whites get reduced as well.  Then a coating for gain is applied.  Even if a screen is a negative gain, it might have a gain coating applied.  For example the BD .8 is a very dark screen and is probably a .5 or less gray screen with a coating to bring it to .8, the 2.7 is a whiter screen with a gain coating applied.  How dark of a base screen, uniformity of the base screen, how much gain is added, uniformity of gain applied, direction of gain (some do better with overhead lighting, some better from the sides, etc.) all play a part in the design decisions when manufacturing a screen.  The better screens have pretty involved processes and cost more.

Once a coating is applied you are bending light and some artifacts will be introduced and viewing angle will be reduced if you are reflecting more light back to the viewers.  There is no free lunch with light and physics.  The question is how noticeable are the artifacts and does the positive attributes outweigh the tradeoffs.  No one is going to recommend one of these high contrast gain screens for a screen in a reference "bat cave" type environment.  It will be easier to notice these artifacts in a reference environment but that is not the application these screens were intended.

Many of use our projection systems in a variety of conditions and we have to decide which attributes are most important to us and what tradeoffs we are willing to live with.  No screen is perfect for all situations.  One has to decide which screen is best for their situation.

I agree to the extend that not even the same projector will work on a very bright room nor dim room; in fact, 3D is another variable for which you have to compromise. For example, I used to have an Epson which was very bright which was awesome for sports on fairly lit room; movies was another story. I went to a JVC because of the movie picture quality was much better in my opinion. Therefore, I am overall very happy with my choice which is mainly movies and TV in a dark room.
I think that if you have the space and money (4K is a good budget) I would get a retractable Firehawk G3 or similar for nigh viewing and a BD for daylight viewing. You could probably use the BD for 3D viewing as well.
post #3200 of 3550
Steve, the 751bd moves the subtitles up and down as well. My room has cream walls, but most of my viewing will be in the night time so I went with the BD with a 1.4 gain.
I guess the only thing Im worried about is if I should change from a flat to a curved screen. I will be sitting around 15' away, and my throw distance is 2.15. The projector will be directly on top of where I am sitting.
post #3201 of 3550
i'm designing a house and will either go with a dedicated theater room with NO windows in it. or go with an open rec room with a projector (with one window that will be covered with barely any light being able to pass through).

I will use it to watch tv (mostly sports), video games, and just use the room to listen to music on my speakers.

so from reading the past few pages of comments, it looks like I should go with a Black Diamond screen if I do the rec room with a projector in it.


and go with a different screen if I will have a mostly black theater, or dimmed theater so i can walk around and such in it?

price isn't a big deal to me, i would prefer 16-9 and 150 or so inches and that's not available with black diamond. but if the picture is much better i would give up.


related question. what's this 2.5:1 or whatever screen size they have. How is watching satllite or blu-rays on it, since they are both 16:9.
(Same with watching old 4:3 tv shows)?
post #3202 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajistheman View Post

i'm designing a house and will either go with a dedicated theater room with NO windows in it. or go with an open rec room with a projector (with one window that will be covered with barely any light being able to pass through).

I will use it to watch tv (mostly sports), video games, and just use the room to listen to music on my speakers.

so from reading the past few pages of comments, it looks like I should go with a Black Diamond screen if I do the rec room with a projector in it.


and go with a different screen if I will have a mostly black theater, or dimmed theater so i can walk around and such in it?

price isn't a big deal to me, i would prefer 16-9 and 150 or so inches and that's not available with black diamond. but if the picture is much better i would give up.


related question. what's this 2.5:1 or whatever screen size they have. How is watching satllite or blu-rays on it, since they are both 16:9.
(Same with watching old 4:3 tv shows)?

You are asking about a scope screen. Some times called 2.35. This is the aspect ration of many movies. When you watch a movie on your HD TV and you have black bars top and bottom, the image is shown in scope format. Now imagine a great big screen like that. The draw back to a scope screen is, your 16:9 material will be much smaller. Scope format is the movie lovers screen. Also you have to select equipment to work together to produce a scope image. You can do so by using a projector that has lens memory. You can use a video processor to re-scale the image or you can use an Anamorphic lens. If you want to get into this more, shoot me an email. I sent you a PM.
Reply
Reply
post #3203 of 3550
So I think I've decided against the DNP 08-85 screen. I had an 80" sample for a week and I was comparing to my interim Elite Sabel 1.8 gain screen. I just didn't see much of a difference in my room between the two screens that would justify the 10X price difference. I will post this in another thread but just thought I would solicit the input of the BD owners. I think the DNP is best suited for light coming from above the screen. My problem light is from the side so It didn't perform much better than the $380 Elite screen in that regard. Also, because the Elite is listed at 1.8 gain it was much brighter than the 0.8 DNP which I preferred both for sports duing the day AND movies at night. There is a bit of hot spotting on the Elite but not terrible. Go figure. I actually preferred the $380 screen over the $3800 screen. Maybe the DNP is just not the best screen for my application. One thing I still need to see is if the DNP 08-85 material throws less light back to my room that has bright colored walls and a white ceiling. Obviously the Elite screen has its flaws which is why my search for a screen continues. At this point I am looking for something in between the two price points. Any advice is welcomed.

Projector - Sony HW50es
Screen Size - 110 to 115" max
Throw - 12'
Seating Distance - 11 to 13'
Viewing break down 40% sports, 10% hdtv, 50% movies, some 3D.
Non-dedicated living room with some ambient and room lighting from the side and opposite the screen but no light from above the screen.


I might take another look at BD because of my side ambient light issue but I can also just black out that problem window but that gets me back to ground zero in deciding on a screen. I more about getting the best screen for my room than the cost but aside from the Black Diamond side ambient like rejection, what other screen will give me the best performance overall?
post #3204 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by howletus View Post

Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.

1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.

2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.

People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.

My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.

One thing that I thinks get lost in all of this is the color of the side walls and carpet. We seem to focus so much on "how much light do I want on when I am watching? what about the windows?" These are controllable. Turn off the lights. put black curtains on the windows.

However, it is the light bouncing off the walls (especially the side walls) and the floor that ultimately may be the 'gotcha.' I took a picture of my room with all the lights off, windows blocked. I snapped it and was FLOORED at how bright the room was with the tiny flash of the phone camera! It was as if I turned on the lights at about 50%! And that was the lumens from my phone! Imagine what the light BOUNCING OFF THE WALLS AND FLOOR will look like with a projector pumping out 1000+ lumens! I think THAT is my concern.

My prior house had black ceiling and walls, dark carpet and black chairs. About as much as a bat cave as I have been in. White screen for that room is fine.

This room? I am leaning that I don't really have a choice but to explore a BD.

To further drive home the point, I called up Carada and spoke to them about my situation and was very surprised that they said they didn't think any of their screens were best suited for my environment. They offered to send me samples, but I left the call thinking that I needed something like a BD.

I think as more of us are moving away from dedicated HT rooms, and looking more and more to having a projector/screen combo in a multi-purpose room, screen manufacturers have to come up with alternatives besides BD and Firehawk - both which are pretty expensive options. As the price of projectors come further down (even the sub $3k projectors are getting decent reviews), that we will get to a point where the screen will cost just as much - if not more - than the projector. At that point (and I think we are not that far away from there right now), we need something more affordable to meet our needs.

Just my opinion of course.. Caveat emptor, YMMV, and all that stuff.
post #3205 of 3550

Unfortunately, it is not cheap to make these screens well.  Some other options that are less expensive are Da-lite High Contrast Cinema Vision or Stewart Cima Tiburon.  Or for cheaper options a basic gray screen helps but you need the lumens to use them.  If you don't go too big they can work decent for not much money.

post #3206 of 3550
Unfortunately reviews for those cheaper screens are not encouraging.

And the BD can't go larger than a 113" 16:9 screen.

No perfect screen, that's for sure...
post #3207 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post


That being said, I have recently read some very interesting articles that Blu-ray limits the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens. (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436729/anamorphic-encoded-blu-rays-on-the-horizon)

I didn't know that. This alone has changed my mind to get a 2:35 screen with an anamorphic lens.

Getting a large 16:9 screen instead.


I'd say not so fast on that decision. Your post implies that you started with some interest in a 2:35:1 CIH set up, is that correct?

If so, I suggest you do a bit more research because it appears you might not have fully understood what is going on in CIH set ups. Blu-Ray doesn't "limit the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens." You will still get exactly the same resolution in a 2:35:1 CIH set up with an A-lens as you would if you had no anamorphic lens with a 16:9 screen. In fact, with an A-lens you'll actually get more pixels on your screen for the image than if you stuck with a 16:9 screen. That is, in a 16:9 set up all the pixels that are turned "off" on your projector (projecting black) to make the black bars for a 2:35:1 image would instead, with an A-lens and anamorphic processing, be remapped to ALL your projector's pixels. It's not an increase in source detail per-se, but it can have some beneficial effects. (Sometimes increasing image brightness when compared to zooming the image out, sometimes adding a smoother more "dense" looking image with that finer pixel structure on screen).

But all that is mostly a means to the main end of a 2:35:1 CIH system over a 16:9 system: It makes CinemaScope images FAR larger (usually because you'd be buying a wider 2:35:1 screen than a 16:9 screen) and at the very least will make Scope images much more immersive than your 16:9 images. And no black bars at all for CinemaScope movies - it's hard to appreciate just how much better that is until you've lived with it, then you can't go back.

There is this issue: In a CIH system you are increasing the image size for CinemaScope content and any time you make an image bigger you put more stress on the quality of the source material. (You'd have exactly the same problem if you buy a bigger 16:9 screen instead of a scope screen). However, the quality in Blu-Ray sources generally handle being larger quite well, sometimes startlingly so (sometimes you don't know just how sharp a Blu-Ray image is until you see just how big it can get and remain that sharp). By far the vast majority of people who went with a CIH system have found any issues swamped by the satisfaction of a much larger, more immersive and cinematic CinemaScope image with no black bars (feels more professional and cinematic that way).

So, if you are intrigued by the concept of a much larger CinemaScope image with no black bars, don't give up too fast. **

Rich H

**(Of course with a CIH set up you do get black bars on the sides for 16:9/1:85:1 content, but they can usually be masked away more easily than the top bottom black bars on a 16:9 screen).
post #3208 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post

Unfortunately reviews for those cheaper screens are not encouraging.

And the BD can't go larger than a 113" 16:9 screen.

No perfect screen, that's for sure...

115" on Zero Edge - to get an idea how a 115" looks see the video www.screeninnovations.com
post #3209 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Benkin View Post

One thing that I thinks get lost in all of this is the color of the side walls and carpet. We seem to focus so much on "how much light do I want on when I am watching? what about the windows?" These are controllable. Turn off the lights. put black curtains on the windows.

However, it is the light bouncing off the walls (especially the side walls) and the floor that ultimately may be the 'gotcha.' I took a picture of my room with all the lights off, windows blocked. I snapped it and was FLOORED at how bright the room was with the tiny flash of the phone camera! It was as if I turned on the lights at about 50%! And that was the lumens from my phone! Imagine what the light BOUNCING OFF THE WALLS AND FLOOR will look like with a projector pumping out 1000+ lumens! I think THAT is my concern.

My prior house had black ceiling and walls, dark carpet and black chairs. About as much as a bat cave as I have been in. White screen for that room is fine.

This room? I am leaning that I don't really have a choice but to explore a BD.

To further drive home the point, I called up Carada and spoke to them about my situation and was very surprised that they said they didn't think any of their screens were best suited for my environment. They offered to send me samples, but I left the call thinking that I needed something like a BD.

I think as more of us are moving away from dedicated HT rooms, and looking more and more to having a projector/screen combo in a multi-purpose room, screen manufacturers have to come up with alternatives besides BD and Firehawk - both which are pretty expensive options. As the price of projectors come further down (even the sub $3k projectors are getting decent reviews), that we will get to a point where the screen will cost just as much - if not more - than the projector. At that point (and I think we are not that far away from there right now), we need something more affordable to meet our needs.

Just my opinion of course.. Caveat emptor, YMMV, and all that stuff.

Keep in mind, Screens, amps and speakers are usually the few items in an HT that do not get upgraded often. What I mean, buy the correct screen and speakers for you and you will keep them a long time. AVR's and projectors on the other hand, get changed out often. So rather than look at the cost ratio of one projector to one screen, maybe you should look at the ratio of two or three projectors to one screen. In other words, get a good screen and you should be good for a very long time. Your projector, you will be wanting to replace it in a few years.
Reply
Reply
post #3210 of 3550
I have a 113" 1.4 Fixed frame setup with a dink in the screen. I'd be interested in getting a quote on a replacement screen for it.

Can anyone here help with that?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Screens
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › Black Diamond from Screen Innovations?