2.39:1 Projector Screen (No Overspill) Equipment Needed? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
  • 1 Post By Craig Peer
  • 2 Post By jeahrens
  • 1 Post By Josh Z
  • 1 Post By jeahrens
  • 1 Post By jeahrens
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 04:29 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
2.39:1 Projector Screen (No Overspill) Equipment Needed?

I'm in the midst of creating a cinema experience in my living room.

I want to achieve a 2.39:1 projection without any overspilled black letterbox bars on top and bottom of the screen.

I have both the OPPO-203 and the Lumagen Radiance Pro.


Regarding the projector, I've been looking at LG's HU85LA, but quickly realized it's not worth the money.

I could have the JVC NX-5/RS1000 at the same price point, which has lens memory.


All in all, I am doubtful that any of the above equipment will provide me the experience I seek, no overspill on a 2.39:1 screen.

I will mostly be watching 2.39:1 content, letting the Lumagen perform 'NLS' with 16:9 content or just leave it be.


To my questions:

1) Would the OPPO-203 optically cut away the overspilled black letterboxed bars with its 21:9 feature? I know 21:9 translates to 2.37:1.

2) Neither the JVC or the Lumagen would be able to optically cut away the black letterbox bars, only an anamorphic lens would achieve this?


Please note that I am performing this in a living room, having black overspilled letterbox bars is no where near ideal, it would clearly show.

Also, sometimes I am surprised at how much money one can spend and still not achieve a correct aspect ratio handling.


Thank you everyone for all your assistance.
Vitus4K is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 11:08 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 16,547
Mentioned: 116 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7114 Post(s)
Liked: 8466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
I'm in the midst of creating a cinema experience in my living room.

I want to achieve a 2.39:1 projection without any overspilled black letterbox bars on top and bottom of the screen.

I have both the OPPO-203 and the Lumagen Radiance Pro.


Regarding the projector, I've been looking at LG's HU85LA, but quickly realized it's not worth the money.

I could have the JVC NX-5/RS1000 at the same price point, which has lens memory.


All in all, I am doubtful that any of the above equipment will provide me the experience I seek, no overspill on a 2.39:1 screen.

I will mostly be watching 2.39:1 content, letting the Lumagen perform 'NLS' with 16:9 content or just leave it be.


To my questions:

1) Would the OPPO-203 optically cut away the overspilled black letterboxed bars with its 21:9 feature? I know 21:9 translates to 2.37:1.

2) Neither the JVC or the Lumagen would be able to optically cut away the black letterbox bars, only an anamorphic lens would achieve this?


Please note that I am performing this in a living room, having black overspilled letterbox bars is no where near ideal, it would clearly show.

Also, sometimes I am surprised at how much money one can spend and still not achieve a correct aspect ratio handling.


Thank you everyone for all your assistance.
You can get rid of those black bars by adding an anamorphic lens like a Panamorph Paladin or DCR lens. Short of that, you will be over scanning those black bars.
Josh Z likes this.

[email protected] JVC RS4500, Lumagen Radiance Pro, Panamorph Paladin DCR lens, Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreens - 128" diagonal 2.35:1 ST130 & 122" diagonal 16:9 Cima Neve, Denon X8500, Parasound A 52+ amp, Martin Logan Motion series 9.4 speakers, four SVS subs, Panasonic UB820, Oppo 203, PFP M1500 UPS
Craig Peer is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 11:20 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
You can get rid of those black bars by adding an anamorphic lens like a Panamorph Paladin or DCR lens. Short of that, you will be over scanning those black bars.



Right, OPPO-203 is not sufficient, even if satisfied by a 2.37:1 ratio instead of pure 2.39:1?
Vitus4K is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 12:36 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Right, OPPO-203 is not sufficient, even if satisfied by a 2.37:1 ratio instead of pure 2.39:1?
I have the opportunity to collect a Schneider CINE-DIGITAR 1.33x Mark I.


75mm rear element , 85mm rear diameter, 100mm rear outer housing
97mm front element diameter, 102mm front outer diameter, 1.1kg weight



Model number 15014995


Would this buy a good purchase accomodating my wishes?
Vitus4K is offline  
post #5 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 01:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,283
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2218 Post(s)
Liked: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Please note that I am performing this in a living room, having black overspilled letterbox bars is no where near ideal, it would clearly show.
A good lens is going to be $5K+. Do you have really have no option to treat the screen wall and ceiling? If they are that light, you'd really want to do this to cut back on the light pollution you're going to get from reflections (whether you go with a lens or not).

With the black floor on the JVC any dark flat color will make the bars invisible. There's the popular black felt option too. Also the 17:9 panel on the NX5 means the bars will be smaller vs. a 16:9 projector.

As a practical matter I wouldn't worry about 2.37 vs 2.39:1. They are within inches of each other.
Josh Z and Craig Peer like this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 01:13 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
A good lens is going to be $5K+. Do you have really have no option to treat the screen wall and ceiling? If they are that light, you'd really want to do this to cut back on the light pollution you're going to get from reflections (whether you go with a lens or not).

With the black floor on the JVC any dark flat color will make the bars invisible. There's the popular black felt option too. Also the 17:9 panel on the NX5 means the bars will be smaller vs. a 16:9 projector.

As a practical matter I wouldn't worry about 2.37 vs 2.39:1. They are within inches of each other.
Impossible to cover up anything, it's a living room, anything other than interior design is allowed... wife.


The Schneider 1.33x was around $6K back in 2016, correct?


Is it not a good lens?
Vitus4K is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 10-18-2019, 01:29 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,181
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4390 Post(s)
Liked: 3338
I concur with everything jehrens said. Based on my experience testing an older Panamorph lens with a new projector, older lenses may not be capable of passing 4k detail. If you really want to go the lens route, I would not touch anything short of a new Panamorph Paladin model.

Your easiest and most cost effective solution here will be to either paint or cover the walls behind your screen. If painting is not an option due to spousal acceptance, some black felt stretched across a frame will do nicely. You might even rig something up that can be removed when not in use.
Craig Peer likes this.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.

Last edited by Josh Z; 10-19-2019 at 12:29 PM.
Josh Z is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 10-19-2019, 01:09 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Thanks for your valuable assistance.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 10-20-2019, 11:41 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 16,547
Mentioned: 116 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7114 Post(s)
Liked: 8466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
I concur with everything jehrens said. Based on my experience testing an older Panamorph lens with a new projector, older lenses may not be capable of passing 4k detail. If you really want to go the lens route, I would not touch anything short of a new Panamorph Paladin model.

Your easiest and most cost effective solution here will be to either paint or cover the walls behind your screen. If painting is not an option due to spousal acceptance, some black felt stretched across a frame will do nicely. You might even rig something up that can be removed when not in use.
Doesn't even have to be black. Darker colored curtains - velvet curtains are nice, will work too. And can be worked into the WAF / interior design.

[email protected] JVC RS4500, Lumagen Radiance Pro, Panamorph Paladin DCR lens, Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreens - 128" diagonal 2.35:1 ST130 & 122" diagonal 16:9 Cima Neve, Denon X8500, Parasound A 52+ amp, Martin Logan Motion series 9.4 speakers, four SVS subs, Panasonic UB820, Oppo 203, PFP M1500 UPS
Craig Peer is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 05:17 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Craig, great suggestions, although the issue on my end is not really the letterboxing, color of velvet fabrics, or any interior design, to be frank.


The biggest issue is the height of my wall compared to the width, for the best experience I would need as wide as possible without going taller.


If I were to mask, the masking would come down over my center channel and height speakers.


A lens is really the only option.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #11 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 11:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,283
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2218 Post(s)
Liked: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Craig, great suggestions, although the issue on my end is not really the letterboxing, color of velvet fabrics, or any interior design, to be frank.


The biggest issue is the height of my wall compared to the width, for the best experience I would need as wide as possible without going taller.


If I were to mask, the masking would come down over my center channel and height speakers.


A lens is really the only option.
With any darkish flat paint color/fabric you will never see the letterboxing on an JVC NX. Masking is not necessary at all. I have a 130" scope screen that I view using only lens memory/installation modes (no a-lens). The letterbox bars are never visible on either the flat dark red walls or the center channel and its stand.

Again, if your room is light enough to see the letterboxed bars, you will have reflection pollution on the screen to contend with whether you buy a lens or not. If you do want a lens, the Paladin DCR is the best to pair with the JVC NX series.

You need to fix the wall/ceiling issue. Then a lens is a question of whether you have the budget for the proper one or not. Otherwise zooming will work without issue here.


Last edited by jeahrens; 10-21-2019 at 11:22 AM.
jeahrens is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 12:37 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
With any darkish flat paint color/fabric you will never see the letterboxing on an JVC NX.
Attached you'll find an image of my wall color, it's dark grey, and it gets very dark once the ambient light is out.

There's quite a lot of ambient light going on in that photo, I plan to watch mostly when it's dark, if not always.




The side walls are about 1 meter from the outer edges of the screen, colored in a much lighter gray color.




Ceiling is as white as it can get, the room in that photo is not mine, by the way.

If however, I choose to get a lens, which one of the three would you guys pick for the JVC X7900?

Pick your choice, explaining why you would pick them.


1) Schneider Cine-Digitar Anamorphic 1.33x 70mm

2) ISCO Widescreen Attachment 1.33x XL (IIIL)

3) Panamorph Phoenix/Phoenix Pro


My throw distance would be around 5,50 meters, or 18 feet.

117" 2.39:1 scope screen.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	color.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	297.8 KB
ID:	2630254  
Vitus4K is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 01:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,283
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2218 Post(s)
Liked: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Attached you'll find an image of my wall color, it's dark grey, and it gets very dark once the ambient light is out.

There's quite a lot of ambient light going on in that photo, I plan to watch mostly when it's dark, if not always.




The side walls are about 1 meter from the outer edges of the screen, colored in a much lighter gray color.




Ceiling is as white as it can get, the room in that photo is not mine, by the way.

If however, I choose to get a lens, which one of the three would you guys pick for the JVC X7900?

Pick your choice, explaining why you would pick them.


1) Schneider Cine-Digitar Anamorphic 1.33x 70mm

2) ISCO Widescreen Attachment 1.33x XL (IIIL)

3) Panamorph Phoenix/Phoenix Pro


My throw distance would be around 5,50 meters, or 18 feet.

117" 2.39:1 scope screen.
I would get a b-stock NX5 for about the same price as the X7900 and a Paladin DCR. The e-shift you have spec'd will have a bit more contrast, but the NX unit gets you native 4K, better optics, better motion handling and the new Dynamic Tone Mapping with 4K HDR. The latter is a huge advancement in how 4K HDR is handled.

That dark of a grey with no ambient light you would not need to have a lens. Overspill would be a non-issue. Obviously the lens will net you more lumens, just saying it isn't necessary from an overspill standpoint. And you would have ample light for a scope screen that size without one.

If you did decide to forego the lens you could then step up to a JVC NX7 or perhaps NX9. Which in my opinion would be a better overall experience on that screen size than a lesser projector and lens.
Josh Z likes this.


Last edited by jeahrens; 10-21-2019 at 01:39 PM.
jeahrens is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 01:42 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
The e-shift you have spec'd will have a bit more contrast, but the NX unit gets you native 4K, better optics, better motion handling and the new Dynamic Tone Mapping with 4K HDR. The latter is a huge advancement in how 4K HDR is handled.

I did not think about the DTM within the NX5, could pretty much eliminate the Lumagen.


Will have to think this through more.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 03:36 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Right, decision has been made.

As I'm in no special hurry, I'll wait for CEDIA next year and see what impact that might have on the current JVC line up.

I really should be setting the standards to the current generation of technology, meaning 4K, and HDR, instead of something inferior that would be outdated much quicker.

The lens could always be added further on if one feel it being a neccesity, and the Paladin DCR supporting 8K makes it the best investment.

I will first try to accomodate my needs by zooming, I might not see the letterboxing and pillarboxing produced by the 4096 chip.

And, as for the Lumagen, I will first off see what manual calibration and JVC's newly added 'Frame Adapt' does for the picture.

Thanks everyone for your kind contributions.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 10-21-2019, 03:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,283
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2218 Post(s)
Liked: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Right, decision has been made.

As I'm in no special hurry, I'll wait for CEDIA next year and see what impact that might have on the current JVC line up.

I really should be setting the standards to the current generation of technology, meaning 4K, and HDR, instead of something inferior that would be outdated much quicker.

The lens could always be added further on if one feel it being a neccesity, and the Paladin DCR supporting 8K makes it the best investment.

I will first try to accomodate my needs by zooming, I might not see the letterboxing and pillarboxing produced by the 4096 chip.

And, as for the Lumagen, I will first off see what manual calibration and JVC's newly added 'Frame Adapt' does for the picture.

Thanks everyone for your kind contributions.
Unless a competitior drastically shakes up the industry, I wouldn't look for JVC's product lineup to change much for a few years. We're just a year into this product lineups cycle.

You won't see the letterboxing on that grey unless it has some quality not seen in the photos. Having experience DTM (Frame Adapt) on my NX7 I think you will be extremely pleased. It doesn't exceed the results of a Lumagen or MadVR setup, but comes close from the first hand accounts in the owners thread and firmware thread. Also for ARs wider than 1.85:1 make sure use the zoom setting to take advantage of the full panel and thus gain more light.

Good luck and let us know what your findings are!
Craig Peer likes this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 10-29-2019, 11:49 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
rdjam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 9,847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I'd suggest that you also consider using the zoom, and not bother with a panamorphic lens. On my 2.35 screen, I simply zoom in the letterboxed 2.35 content, to match the screen. The blacks of the letterboxing above and below are not visible outside the screen in my setup. And for 16:9 content, I simply zoom back out. I truly find that the digital manipulation used to stretch the 2.35 content to fill all the pixels on a 16:9 panel (just so that you can then put it through a panamorphic lens) actually hurts the image quality, and most projectors have enough light so that this manipulation really isn't necessary, in my opinion.
rdjam is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off