Silver Ticket Screen? - Page 62 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 231Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1831 of 1855 Old 03-07-2020, 05:55 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
Material; Gain; R,G,B percentages
1.1 Matte white: 0.99 98, 100, 101
1.0 Matte grey: 0.59 95, 100, 106
Here’s the Silver Ticket matte white and matte grey side-by-side.



If someone wants/needs a grey screen, 0.6 gain actually makes much more sense. A 10% difference in gain is hardly noticeable.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	48B7E74E-7310-42AA-9737-AA334F351392.jpeg
Views:	389
Size:	171.5 KB
ID:	2694604  

Last edited by Dominic Chan; 03-07-2020 at 07:03 AM.
Dominic Chan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1832 of 1855 Old 03-07-2020, 06:48 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I am trying to understand basics of gain with advertised gain numbers between different makers
Lot of posts indicate Stewart screens are best..
ST130 ... itseems it is as close as 1.3 -- So Stewart screens are perfect and gain numbers match what ever their marketing page showing..
ST 1.0 grey .. 0.59

if PJ is using high lumens and with other ambient light controls, 0.59 gain could be showing probably best blacks .. may be this works 120" inch or less screens.. but at the cost of bulb !
Anything above 130"+ ST grey screens need lot of PJ light (high bulb mode ?) to get satisfied (of coarse other factors like Throw distance etc... ) This is where I am little trouble understanding on overall satisfaction by so many on ST screens... I am referring all this with HDR factors considering
chek39 is offline  
post #1833 of 1855 Old 03-07-2020, 06:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
I am trying to understand basics of gain with advertised gain numbers between different makers
Lot of posts indicate Stewart screens are best..
ST130 ... itseems it is as close as 1.3 -- So Stewart screens are perfect and gain numbers match what ever their marketing page showing..
If you don’t have meters to measure the gains, the best way to get a feel is to order different samples from Stewart and Silver Ticket, and see what a true 1.0 gain looks like.
Dominic Chan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1834 of 1855 Old 03-07-2020, 07:19 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
If you don’t have meters to measure the gains, the best way to get a feel is to order different samples from Stewart and Silver Ticket, and see what a true 1.0 gain looks like.
I don't have meters but mostly I am trying to get advise/feedback and I am reading lot of posts spanned multiple threads on various experiences..

Bottom line is,
based on each unique requirements on screen size, gain, throw distance, seating, PJ etc.. and if anyone buying ST screen and they need to live with their reduced gain screens (but actual requirement on gain may be different)
ST screen price is almost 1/4 (or much less) compare to Stewart's.

@Dominic Chan and @noob00224
Do you use ST screens in your PJ setup ?

Last edited by chek39; 03-07-2020 at 07:33 AM.
chek39 is offline  
post #1835 of 1855 Old 03-07-2020, 09:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 8,762
Mentioned: 157 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4007 Post(s)
Liked: 3176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
People do not use matte white screens to get retina-burning light. Regardless of the screen, the viewing brightness should be set to 50 nits peak (for SDR).

The main advantages of matte white screens are uniform brightness from different viewing angles, and neutral colours.

All "high contrast" screens are directional. The light fall-off may not be very apparent, but is easily demonstrated in a picture like this:

Good info. I'd just add that a neutral density <1.0 gain matte (lambertian) grey screen will produce the same neutral image colors and same uniform brightness from different viewing angles as a neutral density 1.0 gain matte white screen. It's only when the screen has directional gain or does not have neutral density that the image colors and uniform brightness start getting skewed.

For anyone who might be wondering, independent test results have shown that actual screen gain can vary considerably from advertised screen gain. Only a few of the top screen manufacturers such as Stewart Filmscreen are consistently measured to have the same gain as advertised.
Dave in Green is offline  
post #1836 of 1855 Old 03-10-2020, 09:18 AM
Newbie
 
Umrswimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
I am trying to understand basics of gain with advertised gain numbers between different makers
Lot of posts indicate Stewart screens are best..
ST130 ... itseems it is as close as 1.3 -- So Stewart screens are perfect and gain numbers match what ever their marketing page showing..
ST 1.0 grey .. 0.59

if PJ is using high lumens and with other ambient light controls, 0.59 gain could be showing probably best blacks .. may be this works 120" inch or less screens.. but at the cost of bulb !
Anything above 130"+ ST grey screens need lot of PJ light (high bulb mode ?) to get satisfied (of coarse other factors like Throw distance etc... ) This is where I am little trouble understanding on overall satisfaction by so many on ST screens... I am referring all this with HDR factors considering
This is kinda my worry, to be honest. The HC ST screen is advertised at 0.95, but who knows? At 150" and a 20' throw, my 5050ub is going to need a ton of light if the gain turns out to actually be 0.6.

But for $600, it's almost worth the gamble against an SI Slate 1.2 at $3.4k.
Umrswimr is offline  
post #1837 of 1855 Old 03-10-2020, 09:36 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2,509
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1369 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umrswimr View Post
This is kinda my worry, to be honest. The HC ST screen is advertised at 0.95, but who knows? At 150" and a 20' throw, my 5050ub is going to need a ton of light if the gain turns out to actually be 0.6.

But for $600, it's almost worth the gamble against an SI Slate 1.2 at $3.4k.
The ST High Contrast Grey was literally measured in the post above. As well as the Matte Grey.

SI Slate 1.2 require 1.8-1.9x throw ratio / width to avoid artifacts, so for an 150" that's around 20'.
noob00224 is offline  
post #1838 of 1855 Old 03-10-2020, 02:19 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umrswimr View Post
This is kinda my worry, to be honest. The HC ST screen is advertised at 0.95, but who knows? At 150" and a 20' throw, my 5050ub is going to need a ton of light if the gain turns out to actually be 0.6.

But for $600, it's almost worth the gamble against an SI Slate 1.2 at $3.4k.

That is my exact point and not able to connect. There are thousands of happy customers with ST screens and one of the most critical ask is "gain" and lot of things depend on this factor.
Either all the customers are happy at the ST price or may not be really realizing what really the term gain means..
oh man
chek39 is offline  
post #1839 of 1855 Old 03-10-2020, 02:39 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umrswimr View Post
This is kinda my worry, to be honest. The HC ST screen is advertised at 0.95, but who knows? At 150" and a 20' throw, my 5050ub is going to need a ton of light if the gain turns out to actually be 0.6.

But for $600, it's almost worth the gamble against an SI Slate 1.2 at $3.4k.
By the way, how was your experience with 5050ub and 150" screen at 20ft throw ?
How far you sit ?

I was planning to go for 158" initially with Epson 6050 or NX5 and most of the advises i got here is to stay around 130" to 140" range considering HDR, seating distance, reduce lamp brightness over period etc..
chek39 is offline  
post #1840 of 1855 Old 03-11-2020, 08:20 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umrswimr View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
I am trying to understand basics of gain with advertised gain numbers between different makers
Lot of posts indicate Stewart screens are best..
ST130 ... itseems it is as close as 1.3 -- So Stewart screens are perfect and gain numbers match what ever their marketing page showing..
ST 1.0 grey .. 0.59

if PJ is using high lumens and with other ambient light controls, 0.59 gain could be showing probably best blacks .. may be this works 120" inch or less screens.. but at the cost of bulb !
Anything above 130"+ ST grey screens need lot of PJ light (high bulb mode ?) to get satisfied (of coarse other factors like Throw distance etc... ) This is where I am little trouble understanding on overall satisfaction by so many on ST screens... I am referring all this with HDR factors considering
This is kinda my worry, to be honest. The HC ST screen is advertised at 0.95, but who knows? At 150" and a 20' throw, my 5050ub is going to need a ton of light if the gain turns out to actually be 0.6.

But for $600, it's almost worth the gamble against an SI Slate 1.2 at $3.4k. [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif[/IMG]
This screen is for sure less than 0.95 gain, and also has angular gain like any ALR screen even though ST says it is matte. Its definitely a worse material than Slate 1.2: similar black levels but much duller whites, and also more screen texture. But the viewing angle is marginally better, it will hotspot less, and it is WAY cheaper
Cryptic7 is offline  
post #1841 of 1855 Old 03-11-2020, 10:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
kensingtonwick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdd770 View Post
We bought this screen on Amazon based on the reviews and the needs of the size and format. It certainly delivers.

The build quality is excellent. There were no instructions! so warning...it ended up being no big deal.
There is a 4 step list on the Amazon description in the ad for it, listed in the several images attached to the ad. Also there is a high speed build video on you tube that you can follow for it, if you do a search for this screen. In the video there is a cross bar that the 120 inch model doesn't have, and in the video it seems to come in more sections. Maybe the manufacturer made it with solid top and bottom so there was no more need for a center brace.

When you put the clips in that hold the screen, there are little arrows there for guidance as to where to place them. Use them, BUT don't be afraid to move them slightly here and there, once you are stretching the screen around and anchoring it. They may need to move to match the anchor holes so there is no binding of the material. Don't worry. The surface is flawless in the end.

Anyway, it took 1hr and 10 mins to build, but if I had to do it again, it would take about 30 mins now that I know how.

Hanging on the wall was a snap. It has sliding hooks so you can move the whole screen left and right after hanging on wall studs with screws and a level.

The black borders are really nice, with black velvet to catch any spill-over and it looks very good on the wall.

The picture quality is stunning in our opinion. We are using the BenQ 1070 projector, (also I highly recommend it too), a completely blacked out theater room, and the combination is awesome.
I recommend Gamma be set to 2.8 on the 1070 to really get the blacks dialed in.  We immediately invited over some friends who are in the market for a screen, played a snowboarding Blu Ray from Alaska ("The Art of Flight") , and they immediately went home and ordered it. Highly recommend!
It looks really really good. No problem with colors either.  Very vivid and rich picture in our opinion.
Hope that helps.


The art of flight is amazing!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
kensingtonwick is offline  
post #1842 of 1855 Old 03-11-2020, 11:15 AM
Newbie
 
Umrswimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
By the way, how was your experience with 5050ub and 150" screen at 20ft throw ?
How far you sit ?

I was planning to go for 158" initially with Epson 6050 or NX5 and most of the advises i got here is to stay around 130" to 140" range considering HDR, seating distance, reduce lamp brightness over period etc..
I'll let you know once it's installed, I guess. I haven't pulled the trigger yet because I haven't decided on a screen. Maybe I'll order everything else and save the screen for last.

I'll have two rows: 11.5' and 19' in a 16x25' room with 10' ceilings. Planning 7.1.4 since I don't really trust the 13 channel pre/pro offerings out there right now- too many bugs.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Theater_overhead_2.pdf (82.7 KB, 9 views)
File Type: pdf Theater_overhead.pdf (74.3 KB, 9 views)
Umrswimr is offline  
post #1843 of 1855 Old 03-13-2020, 01:07 PM
Senior Member
 
jer181's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
At the price ST is asking, their new ALR material better be impressive. Their msrp for a 120" screen is a budget-melting $4,499.98 with current sale price of $2,259.98. If you dig deep enough into their website they do have at least a brief description of this new material:
I was one of the 1st to get this screen a couple years ago. I had ordered the standard AT screen and was having major problems with it so they sent this screen they were thinking about putting into production. They sent it as replacement for the same price, I couldn't be happier as its a great product.
jer181 is offline  
post #1844 of 1855 Old 03-14-2020, 02:55 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I don't know how to measure gains and don't have meters

what are the real measured gains for Elite Screens ?

Cinewhite with 1.1
Cinegray 3d with 1.2
Cinegray with 1.0

Thanks
chek39 is offline  
post #1845 of 1855 Old 03-14-2020, 10:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2,509
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1369 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by chek39 View Post
I don't know how to measure gains and don't have meters

what are the real measured gains for Elite Screens ?

Cinewhite with 1.1
Cinegray 3d with 1.2
Cinegray with 1.0

Thanks
1.0
0.7
Hasn't been measured, but I think it's ~0.5
noob00224 is offline  
post #1846 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 12:28 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Recently built a DIY screen with the silver ticket 1.3 raw material and I’m having a frustrating issue. I’m not sure what term to use for it, but when projecting a bright uniform moving image (I.e sky, pan across fire etc) I get a weird artifacting, similar to looking at a smartphone screen that’s been smudged by finger prints. Now that I’ve seen it it’s all I can see. Already took the screen down and pulled the material tighter, but it’s still there. Also idiot checked myself and cleaned the projector lens.

Silver ticket suggested I’m just seeing the “uniformity” of my projector. Any suggestions? Might I be happier with something like Carl’s flexi-white? Is this a common issue with screens?

I’m close to the minimum throw distance (around 13’ to a 118” screen), but I can’t really go closer or farther as my PJ is mounted in a custom hush box and I’m at the limits of my space.
filmgeek47 is offline  
post #1847 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 01:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2,509
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1369 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgeek47 View Post
Recently built a DIY screen with the silver ticket 1.3 raw material and I’m having a frustrating issue. I’m not sure what term to use for it, but when projecting a bright uniform moving image (I.e sky, pan across fire etc) I get a weird artifacting, similar to looking at a smartphone screen that’s been smudged by finger prints. Now that I’ve seen it it’s all I can see. Already took the screen down and pulled the material tighter, but it’s still there. Also idiot checked myself and cleaned the projector lens.

Silver ticket suggested I’m just seeing the “uniformity” of my projector. Any suggestions? Might I be happier with something like Carl’s flexi-white? Is this a common issue with screens?

I’m close to the minimum throw distance (around 13’ to a 118” screen), but I can’t really go closer or farther as my PJ is mounted in a custom hush box and I’m at the limits of my space.
It might be banding:
https://www.google.com/search?q=band..._AUoAHoECAEQAA


Pause the video where it happens, and put a white piece of paper over it.

You can also move the projector slightly/lens shift and see if the artifact remains on the screen or it moves with the image.
noob00224 is offline  
post #1848 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 04:36 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgeek47 View Post
Recently built a DIY screen with the silver ticket 1.3 raw material and I’m having a frustrating issue. I’m not sure what term to use for it, but when projecting a bright uniform moving image (I.e sky, pan across fire etc) I get a weird artifacting, similar to looking at a smartphone screen that’s been smudged by finger prints. Now that I’ve seen it it’s all I can see. Already took the screen down and pulled the material tighter, but it’s still there. Also idiot checked myself and cleaned the projector lens.

Silver ticket suggested I’m just seeing the “uniformity” of my projector. Any suggestions? Might I be happier with something like Carl’s flexi-white? Is this a common issue with screens?

I’m close to the minimum throw distance (around 13’ to a 118” screen), but I can’t really go closer or farther as my PJ is mounted in a custom hush box and I’m at the limits of my space.
Interesting. Here are some excerpts of email exchanges I had with Silver Ticket in December 2015:

Me:
Quote:
I noticed that there is some "hotspotting", i.e., a brighter spot that corresponds to the direct reflection the of projector light. I somewhat expected this for screen material with higher gain, and don't consider this, by itself, to be a "problem".

However, wherever the hotspot lands on the screen, it also shows some uneven patterns on the screen. The patterns are not visible outside the hotspot. When viewing from a different angle, the hotspot moves to a different part on the screen (again, to be expected), and similar patterns will be visible at that part of the screen.
ST:
Quote:
The production staff required me to stress to you that the material is delicate and to be sure to handle it with care when working with it. They are convinced that the marks are a result of scuffing from when you were building it since we sell lots and lots of this material without any issues like this.
Me:
Quote:
I cannot rule out the possibility of the marks being caused by handling during the construction, but as mentioned previous, I would expect that kind of damage to be more random in pattern, and also not all over the screen. In any case, when I receive the replacement I will check it using the projector light before I construct the pockets, as the marks are not visible under normal lighting.
Quote:
I turned the screen material around to use the other side as the viewing side. There are one or two scuffs and other marks as I was not trying to protect that side during construction, but there is none of the other marks like those shown in my picture.

Thus it seems to me there is a "good" side and a "bad" side of the material, even though they look extremely similar under normal lighting. It would help if the the factory marks the intended viewing side. Should I assume that side that faces "in" (towards the middle of the roll) is the viewing side?
ST:
Quote:
I just heard back that our staff does usually mark with a label which side is the back

Last edited by Dominic Chan; 03-17-2020 at 06:17 AM.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #1849 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 04:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
Interesting. Here are some excerpts of email exchanges I had with Silver Ticket in December 2015:

Me:


ST:


Me:




ST:
Dominic, do you happen to still have the photo of your issue?

I pulled my screen off the wall, flipped it over, and leaned it as tight to the wall as possible to mimic the effect of re-stapling and reversing the fabric. I’m pretty sure I used the right side (although they weren’t labeled) as silver ticket told me to use the outside of the roll facing the projector, which I did.

Flipping the screen didn’t seem to have any effect.

Interestingly, when I tested today with samples of Carl’s white, the original 1.0silver ticket white, and Seymour glacier white, only the original silver ticket and GW managed to avoid the issue I’m seeing.

Basically, regardless of screen area, any really bright uniform part of the image kind of sparkles in such a way that you find yourself seeing the screen through the image.

I noticed that if I zoom out so that I’m overshooting more onto the velvet border of my screen the image diminishes considerably.

Is there an optimal range for throw with a projector (ie. Given a choice, do people want to be as close as possible, as far as possible or somewhere in the middle?) I’m weighing trying to remount the projector a couple of inches farther back inside my hushbox to see if that has an effect, but it’d be a real pain to do, so I’d rather avoid it if it seems unlikely to help.
filmgeek47 is offline  
post #1850 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 04:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgeek47 View Post
Dominic, do you happen to still have the photo of your issue?

I pulled my screen off the wall, flipped it over, and leaned it as tight to the wall as possible to mimic the effect of re-stapling and reversing the fabric. I’m pretty sure I used the right side (although they weren’t labeled) as silver ticket told me to use the outside of the roll facing the projector, which I did.

Flipping the screen didn’t seem to have any effect.

Interestingly, when I tested today with samples of Carl’s white, the original 1.0silver ticket white, and Seymour glacier white, only the original silver ticket and GW managed to avoid the issue I’m seeing.

Basically, regardless of screen area, any really bright uniform part of the image kind of sparkles in such a way that you find yourself seeing the screen through the image.

I noticed that if I zoom out so that I’m overshooting more onto the velvet border of my screen the image diminishes considerably.

Is there an optimal range for throw with a projector (ie. Given a choice, do people want to be as close as possible, as far as possible or somewhere in the middle?) I’m weighing trying to remount the projector a couple of inches farther back inside my hushbox to see if that has an effect, but it’d be a real pain to do, so I’d rather avoid it if it seems unlikely to help.
Sounds like what I saw was a different problem. I would describe it as a "dirty screen effect" which I thought was also what you were describing when you said "similar to looking at a smartphone screen that’s been smudged by finger prints".

However, if you're seeing sparkles, that's something I've not seen with the 1.3 material (but have seen plenty with the Silver Material).

I've attached the photo here but it's hard to see the issue in a photo.

Can you take a close-up picture of the different materials, similar to what I did here:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...l#post59004682

In that picture the raw material looks much smoother than the matte white, essentially texture-free.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1768_Pattern.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	542.5 KB
ID:	2699126  

Last edited by Dominic Chan; 03-17-2020 at 04:59 PM.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #1851 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 06:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
Sounds like what I saw was a different problem. I would describe it as a "dirty screen effect" which I thought was also what you were describing when you said "similar to looking at a smartphone screen that’s been smudged by finger prints".

However, if you're seeing sparkles, that's something I've not seen with the 1.3 material (but have seen plenty with the Silver Material).

I've attached the photo here but it's hard to see the issue in a photo.

Can you take a close-up picture of the different materials, similar to what I did here:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...l#post59004682

In that picture the raw material looks much smoother than the matte white, essentially texture-free.
Yeah, different issue. Mine is more subtle. It’s not a product of the texture showing up, so much as the screen seeming to sparkle to a distracting degree in the highlights. I’m guessing it’s a result of higher gain material/my sensitivity/ projector being mounted high shooting down and almost as close as the throw range will allow.
filmgeek47 is offline  
post #1852 of 1855 Old 03-17-2020, 07:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Here’s a closeup shot. From left to right it’s ST 1.3, GW, and ST 1.0.

A random thought... could the lack of a black backing be causing my problem (i.e. light from the wall could be bouncing back through the screen? My walls are painted matte navy.

EDIT:
Oops. Forgot to attach.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	35E2204A-48D8-4085-9EE5-096524DB80BC.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	90.0 KB
ID:	2699178  

Last edited by filmgeek47; 03-18-2020 at 12:15 AM.
filmgeek47 is offline  
post #1853 of 1855 Old 03-18-2020, 09:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgeek47 View Post
A random thought... could the lack of a black backing be causing my problem (i.e. light from the wall could be bouncing back through the screen? My walls are painted matte navy.
I doubt it. My wall is actually white behind it, as I was previously using the painted wall as the screen. Can you capture the reported problem in a picture?

How are you stretching it? It doesn't work well unless tightly stretched.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #1854 of 1855 Old 03-18-2020, 11:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
I doubt it. My wall is actually white behind it, as I was previously using the painted wall as the screen. Can you capture the reported problem in a picture?

How are you stretching it? It doesn't work well unless tightly stretched.
I tried getting a photo but it doesn’t really come out.

I’m yanking and stapling. Pulled it off the wall and re-stapled to get it even tighter. Seemed to help a bit but it’s still present.

What’s your throw distance?

Last edited by filmgeek47; 03-18-2020 at 11:34 PM.
filmgeek47 is offline  
post #1855 of 1855 Old 03-19-2020, 06:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,107
Mentioned: 171 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5825 Post(s)
Liked: 2336
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgeek47 View Post
I tried getting a photo but it doesn’t really come out.

I’m yanking and stapling. Pulled it off the wall and re-stapled to get it even tighter. Seemed to help a bit but it’s still present.

What’s your throw distance?
My throw distance is about 13 feet, but throw distance shouldn’t have any effect other than making the brightness fall off faster off-centre.
Dominic Chan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Screens

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