2.35:1 - how big will the 16:9 be on the screen? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 17Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 37 Old 07-21-2018, 01:32 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 2
2.35:1 - how big will the 16:9 be on the screen?

Hi,

Looking at a 115" 2.35:1 screen. How big can the 16:9 be? I tried looking for calculators but can't find anything - thanks!
Pleady is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 37 Old 07-21-2018, 01:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Silva741's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Silva741 is offline  
post #3 of 37 Old 07-21-2018, 01:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Thank you! That was quick

So if I did a 120" 16:9 I could use it as a 115" 2.35:1? I'm sure my math is off
Pleady is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 37 Old 07-21-2018, 02:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Silva741's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleady View Post
Thank you! That was quick

So if I did a 120" 16:9 I could use it as a 115" 2.35:1? I'm sure my math is off
In that case the 2.35 image would be 113''.


Nothing beats the awesomeness of a real 2.35 screen, though. IMO.
Silva741 is offline  
post #5 of 37 Old 07-21-2018, 08:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,473
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1941 Post(s)
Liked: 1133
numbers rounder to 1/4 inch

115" 2.35 will be 105x45 for 2.35 material and 80x45 (91.75" diagonal) for 16:9.

120" 16:9 will be 104.5x44.5 for 2.35 (113.5" diag) and 104.5x58.75 for 16:9.
Ellebob is online now  
post #6 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 01:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,862
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6580 Post(s)
Liked: 4730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silva741 View Post
In that case the 2.35 image would be 113''.


Nothing beats the awesomeness of a real 2.35 screen, though. IMO.
An even bigger 16:9 screen beats it. If you max your width at 16:9 then there's no benefit for going 2.35:1 anymore.
bud16415 and BattleAxeVR like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is online now  
post #7 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 04:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Silva741's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
An even bigger 16:9 screen beats it. If you max your width at 16:9 then there's no benefit for going 2.35:1 anymore.
That's your opinion.
If you check the 2.35 projection subforum you'll see there are many persons with 2.35 screens.
Silva741 is offline  
post #8 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 05:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,862
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6580 Post(s)
Liked: 4730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silva741 View Post
That's your opinion.
If you check the 2.35 projection subforum you'll see there are many persons with 2.35 screens.
Lots of people having a 2.35 screen doesn't provide evidence for it to be better? I agree there *are* cases where 2.35:1 screen is better. That is when your room is wide enough so that you having a 16:9 screen maxes the height and does not use all the room width. In this case, a 2.35:1 screen will increase the overall size of movie content. But if your room is shaped as such so that you are already at max possible width, there's no good reason to leave part of the vertical space on the wall blank just to have 2.35:1 screen. You can have a 16:9 screen and mask it and its exactly the same as a 2.35:1 screen in that case.
gooch02000 and Nexgen76 like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is online now  
post #9 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 07:00 AM
Senior Member
 
Silva741's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Of course not. Is it just means that for many persons a 2.35 screen is better.

Just as such a screen isn't ideal for many others. For everyone mostly interested in gaming, sports, and TV, a 2.35 screen isn't the best choice.
Craig Peer likes this.
Silva741 is offline  
post #10 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 08:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,473
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1941 Post(s)
Liked: 1133
There are other reasons for choosing one over the other. Speaker placement for good audio and video sight lines especially for two or more rows could be some of them. Personal preference is also part of it, a lot of movie buffs prefer 2.35.
Craig Peer likes this.
Ellebob is online now  
post #11 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 11:58 AM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
IMO...The ONLY really valid reasons someone would prefer a Screen formatted in 16:9 is because the vast majority of content they watch is TV...or that they don't have enough "Width" across the viewing area to accommodate a wide enough 2.39:1 whose height would also give them a respectively large 16:9 Screen.

To some, the ginormous overall impact of having as large as possible 16:9 is what they have always lusted after....because frankly, that's what they are most familiar with. Resolution limitations are played a part, while the sheer Height of a 16:9 screen could put a damper on overall size anyway.

Taking a 60" high 16:9 ( in a room with 9' ceilings. That leaves one with 48" total in which to square the image. 16" down from the Ceiling to the top leaves 32" from the Floor...just about the minimum required for any 2-Row Theater w/10" high Riser.

Of course those who have just one row of seating don't have that restrictive limitation, and many have opted to have 84" x 149" 16:9 screens (171" diag.) with 12" left at the Top & Bottom on the Wall...or even more Taller, from Base Molding to Crown Molding. Those who opt to Paint a Wall have a serious advantage as to Formatting variables, since with no Borders, there are no size restrictions beyond the usable width of the Screen Wall and the proximity of the Seating.

Over the last 8-9 years, fully 80% of all applications I've been involved with have been centered around "Format-less Painted Walls" with 10% being C.I.H. Screen areas, and the balance being 16:9 screens that were just "there already". (...been 10 yrs since I made my last 16:9'er...)

And absolutely, the most popular have been those apps where a Lens Memory PJ could just just up whatever size was needed, from epic-like 2.39:1 to maximum height 16:9. After that, the C.I.H. Screens filled in, and as a general rule at a minimum height of 54" was planned....but 60" was in there with regularity.

54" x 129" =140" diag. @ 2.39:1 and 54" x 96" = 110" diag. @ 16:9 The latter being the size 16:9 screen most have...or less..

60" x 143" =155" diag. @ 2.39:1 and 60" x 107" = 123" diag. @ 16:9 If someone has at least a 14' wide room, the 2.39:1 C.H.I. option makes sense, DIY or Mfg.

All the above of course is made innately easier to consider if one has a PJ with Lens Memory, or easily accessed manual Zoom & Lens Shift controls. Beyond that, it's those whose PJs don't have such abilities who are limited to accommodating both Formats within a given Mfg's 16:9 preordained Frame limits.

Yuck. I've been spoiled by having the best of both worlds for so long, it's almost inconceivable to suggest anything other than an ideally suited PJ/Screen combo. And all that really means it to make sure the PJ to be used has at least manual Lens Shift and Zoom. If those conditions are met, there are all the aforementioned options that allow for "as large as possible" projected imagery available.

.....................and that will never leave one wondering as to what might have been.

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan is offline  
post #12 of 37 Old 07-22-2018, 12:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,473
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1941 Post(s)
Liked: 1133
There are a lot of factors here and each person has to decide what is most important to them. I install projector systems for a living and have two in my home. Both are 2.35 but I watch 90+% movies and the majority of them are 2.35 movies. But it is more than that. One of mine has 7' foot ceilings in the basement and I have screen that covers most of the front wall. If I did a 16:9 I would give up width unless I want to be watching part of the picture through my feet when reclined. The other room has two rows with a curved screen and anamorphic lens. A 16:9 would not be as wide in that room due to sight lines. My sons play Xbox in this room and leaves the lens in place as they don't mind it stretched and feel it is more immersive. Many ceilings up north are 8' and not 9' is another factor. Having shorter ceilings helps with heating costs in the north where down south the taller ceilings keep the heat up higher for better cooling. Of course there are more expensive homes with taller ceilings up north but the average home is 8' and usually closer to 7' for basement. Taller ceilings also help with Atmos.

Normally, I would tell people if most of their viewing is TV/sports than go with 16:9, movie buffs are usually the exception. There area few customers that use a curved screen and a lens to get a wider screen even though it is stretched. They just like the look better for sports particularly. They are rare though, most of the system I install are 16:9 and for most that is what I would recommend depending on the situation.
Silva741 likes this.
Ellebob is online now  
post #13 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 02:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mcallister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 1,684
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 258 Post(s)
Liked: 118
What is the formula for this? How large would a 130” 2:35 screen be masked to 16:9?

I’m currently trying to figure out what size screen to go with. My ceilings are feet and I have a 5” stage my screen wall will be built on and planned on another 5” or less ceiling cloud for 3 LED can lights above/in front of screen the screen wall will pin against. I’d like to go with 120” 16:9 but think the screen would be too low? Any thoughts? Viewing distance is 11.5 feet.

mcallister is offline  
post #14 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 02:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcallister View Post
What is the formula for this? How large would a 130” 2:35 screen be masked to 16:9?

I’m currently trying to figure out what size screen to go with. My ceilings are feet and I have a 5” stage my screen wall will be built on and planned on another 5” or less ceiling cloud for 3 LED can lights above/in front of screen the screen wall will pin against. I’d like to go with 120” 16:9 but think the screen would be too low? Any thoughts? Viewing distance is 11.5 feet.
The answer to your question is 103.83".

Use this site if you want to compare various aspect ratios: http://www.displaywars.com/
mcallister likes this.
entourage2194 is offline  
post #15 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 02:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,541
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2413 Post(s)
Liked: 1694
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
An even bigger 16:9 screen beats it. If you max your width at 16:9 then there's no benefit for going 2.35:1 anymore.
Completely depends on how you've architected your room. Generally you will be between 2-3 screen heights with regards to seating distance. If you're basing that height on a 16:9 screen, then your scope picture will be much smaller and less immersive. If you base your desired screen height/seating ratio with a scope screen 16:9 is unchanged, but scope is perceived 80% larger. Which usually means moving the seating up if you're decreasing height to accommodate scope.

jeahrens is offline  
post #16 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 03:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,862
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6580 Post(s)
Liked: 4730
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
Completely depends on how you've architected your room. Generally you will be between 2-3 screen heights with regards to seating distance. If you're basing that height on a 16:9 screen, then your scope picture will be much smaller and less immersive. If you base your desired screen height/seating ratio with a scope screen 16:9 is unchanged, but scope is perceived 80% larger. Which usually means moving the seating up if you're decreasing height to accommodate scope.
WTF? Why in the world would you need to be between 2-3 screen heights back? That's so far back you can just forget 4K at those distances. Those were great guidelines back in the 480p DVD days. If you sat closer, then you saw all the flaws in the video. I am 8 feet back from a 135" screen and honestly I could get a couple feet closer to really benefit from 4K. It's definitely not too close or too big.

My friend just built a room and is 11 feet back from a 185" 16:9 screen. The front row is 8 feet back its super awesome.
gooch02000 likes this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is online now  
post #17 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 07:29 PM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
Completely depends on how you've architected your room. Generally you will be between 2-3 screen heights with regards to seating distance. If you're basing that height on a 16:9 screen, then your scope picture will be much smaller and less immersive. If you base your desired screen height/seating ratio with a scope screen 16:9 is unchanged, but scope is perceived 80% larger. Which usually means moving the seating up if you're decreasing height to accommodate scope.

A serious reason why I advocate a first Row at 9" in many if not most all of my Theater designs. Using a "Full Wall - Non Formatted" (Paint) approach, the 132" x 55" 2.39:1 screen = 143" diag. Switch to 16:9 and with 132" x 74" the 151" 'er is (...or should be...) big enough for most Individuals and Rooms. Doing the projection in this manner is not new...just all the more appropriate, effectual...and less expensive by a substantial margin since one can ignore the need for Lens Shift / Lens Memory.



Those who want bigger should always consider reducing distance to the screen before trying to accommodate a "Too Large" screen. A big advantage of 4K and the use of LyCos and SXRD is that you can essentially watch from 0.75:1 Distance to Width....to the limit of the peripheral , and see a perfect pixel-free image. Certainly 1:1 will become the standard soon enough.


Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
WTF? Why in the world would you need to be between 2-3 screen heights back? That's so far back you can just forget 4K at those distances. Those were great guidelines back in the 480p DVD days. If you sat closer, then you saw all the flaws in the video. I am 8 feet back from a 135" screen and honestly I could get a couple feet closer to really benefit from 4K. It's definitely not too close or too big.

My friend just built a room and is 11 feet back from a 185" 16:9 screen. The front row is 8 feet back its super awesome.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



Al' sez: "Listen to this Man you must, for he is wise beyond understanding!"




Ooops. I just noticed I posted a similar stance a few steps back. Hmmmmm. sorry...force of habit.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Albert_Einstein_Head_Cleaned_N_Cropped_crop_150x150.jpg
Views:	681
Size:	13.3 KB
ID:	2432730  

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings

Last edited by MississippiMan; 07-25-2018 at 03:42 AM.
MississippiMan is offline  
post #18 of 37 Old 07-24-2018, 10:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ftoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,752
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2781 Post(s)
Liked: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
WTF? Why in the world would you need to be between 2-3 screen heights back?
I am 8 feet back from a 135" screen and honestly I could get a couple feet closer to really benefit from 4K.
My friend just built a room and is 11 feet back from a 185" 16:9 screen. The front row is 8 feet back its super awesome.
Watching widescreen movies on a 185" 16:9 screen from 11ft back (or a 135" 16:9 screen from 8ft back) is about 2 screen-heights back.

Watching 16:9 news, sitcoms or cartoons at the same width (taller height) and wanting to move even closer, that sounds pretty intense.
bud16415 likes this.

Easy $25 DIY black (or any color) ALR paint +$40-$50sprayer screen mix smooth/clean and very easy to learn spraying with little/no mess.
Simple $25-40 DIY black/dark-grey ambient-light rejecting screen, grab two things from a local store..mix..roll..done.
Quick <$250 dedicated black-fabric theater room "A store that sells blinds can help your picture more than a store that sells projectors many times." -bud16415
Ftoast is offline  
post #19 of 37 Old 07-30-2018, 08:56 PM
 
scottyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: mound,mn,usa
Posts: 3,477
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Mississippi man

What do you do for borders on a whole wall screen?
scottyb is offline  
post #20 of 37 Old 07-30-2018, 10:03 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 295
I project on my wall too, I owned an Elite screen before and didn't like it, it had sparkles. I find the diffuse white from my wall to be soothing and uniform.
BattleAxeVR is offline  
post #21 of 37 Old 07-31-2018, 08:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,883
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7974 Post(s)
Liked: 10378
Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleAxeVR View Post
I project on my wall too, I owned an Elite screen before and didn't like it, it had sparkles. I find the diffuse white from my wall to be soothing and uniform.
I prefer my StudioTek 130 - I rarely if ever see sheen / sparkles, I like a screen floating on a black velvet background, and " Ready Player One " on 4K Blu-ray is going to look great at over 45 foot lamberts ! Hard to get that kind of HDR punch off of painted drywall. Plus, I've done more than my share of smooth wall drywall finishing in commercial construction. It's never going to be as smooth and uniform as a quality made screen.
Craig Peer is offline  
post #22 of 37 Old 07-31-2018, 01:51 PM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
I prefer my StudioTek 130 - I rarely if ever see sheen / sparkles, I like a screen floating on a black velvet background, and " Ready Player One " on 4K Blu-ray is going to look great at over 45 foot lamberts ! Hard to get that kind of HDR punch off of painted drywall. Plus, I've done more than my share of smooth wall drywall finishing in commercial construction. It's never going to be as smooth and uniform as a quality made screen.
Both comments are not always correct Craig....,

No # 1 I have produced a great many Painted Screens that equaled the ST130...all the way back in 2003-4. Every bit the gain...absolutely just as smooth. Except NO "Sparkles and/or Sheen", which clearly set the old MississippiMud at a different level than Don's favorite Child. It was exactly those attributes that PO'd the Good ol' Boys on this Forum, who absolutely hated the idea that a $100.00 screen could be the equivalent of a +$2K one. The Gall! I remember it all being called "Snake Oil" and a lot worse, such was the acrimony that developed.

Really, achieving 1.3 Gain is easy peasy. Getting above that without having sparklies or sheen (...please note I said "without"...not "rarely ever"...) is what's tricky.

And smooth? Well one thing that is stressed over on the "other" Forum is the need for "smooth"...especially with 1.0+ Gain ALR-oriented surfaces. As such, I personally try my best to teach those who need instruction on the fine art of Drywall Finishing. We deal with everything from Raw Drywall to smoothing out Texas Splatter Wall or Knockdown Texture. Now I cannot expect most others to achieve a Level 5 finish (...akin to smooth Venetian Plaster...) like I demand of myself, but by gosh they can get close enough. Usually. So "usually" does allow for the occasional "Oops" factor.



To be frank about it, for a very long spell the ONLY Mfg screen that could equal the performance (...and smoothness...) of a well done advanced 1.3 gain DIY Screen was the ST130. As far as the newcomers on the block...the Mfg ALR screens, ....well we can eat thier Lunch.

All the above said, I only ask you to consider that a properly done advanced Drywall Screen has less limitations (size and costs) than any Mfg counterpart. Only the finest examples can clearly be said to be virtually un -matchable (DNP Super Nova is a great example) But we have come awfully close!

Now really, my intention is not to upstage or dismiss the Mfg option...especially on this Forum! Obviously those not into DIY'ing have some good choices out there, and that is and should be the emphasis on this "Screens" Forum. But defending the integrity and honor of, and what the DIY Screen Forum has accomplished is a mandate I accept.

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan is offline  
post #23 of 37 Old 07-31-2018, 02:43 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,883
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7974 Post(s)
Liked: 10378
Ok, I can agree, but it takes some good drywall work, which many do not have ( I'm sure you've done enough that this doesn't apply to you ). Of course, since I need to use an electric screen, a wall option wasn't ever going to work for me anyway!
Craig Peer is offline  
post #24 of 37 Old 07-31-2018, 05:29 PM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
Ok, I can agree, but it takes some good drywall work, which many do not have ( I'm sure you've done enough that this doesn't apply to you ). Of course, since I need to use an electric screen, a wall option wasn't ever going to work for me anyway!

And that is why there should and always will be the MFG avenue for those needing such to turn down.


......but wait! Have you ever read any of my Threads that involved spraying advanced ALR Formulas onto Tab Tension'ed Matte White Screens?


Truly a marriage of "What is and What can be..."

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan is offline  
post #25 of 37 Old 08-04-2018, 09:51 PM
 
scottyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: mound,mn,usa
Posts: 3,477
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Missman,

What do you do for borders on a whole wall screen?
scottyb is offline  
post #26 of 37 Old 08-05-2018, 07:22 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,045
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3001 Post(s)
Liked: 1576
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyb View Post
Missman,

What do you do for borders on a whole wall screen?
You can use Triple Black Velvet. It is $150 for 30 yards on Amazon, or you can buy it for about $8 yard in individual yards.
If you want to use it for temporary masking in all formats, works just as well. Use cardboard or similar with magnets on the back with the Triple Black adhered to the cardboard.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #27 of 37 Old 08-05-2018, 09:16 AM
 
scottyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: mound,mn,usa
Posts: 3,477
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 30
But how do you make it look good, more professional looking rather than hokey?
scottyb is offline  
post #28 of 37 Old 08-05-2018, 03:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
steve1106's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Northern, Va
Posts: 2,190
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 857 Post(s)
Liked: 579
Borders??? Who needs borders???

I've got friends that just painted the entire wall "screen". This lets the pick the size they want and not be in the CIH/CIW box. New projector with a different throw...no problem. Want to do 180" of scope...no problem. Want to do 170" of flat...no problem. In my case, I'm width limited to 132", but to get every possible inch of image, I didn't bother with a border and just screen painted the area I intended to use.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-ge...eap-build.html
Epson HC3800/HC2000; Screen - 151.5" 16:9/TV or 143.5" 2.35:1/HT at a seating distance of 12-15 feet; Yamaha RXV675 for 7.4; Speakers - Infinity Primus; Subs - 3 Polk PSW10s, 1 BIC F12; Headphones - 5 JVC wireless; Sony 4K Blu-ray player/six pairs 3D glasses.
steve1106 is offline  
post #29 of 37 Old 08-05-2018, 03:34 PM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyb View Post
Missman,

What do you do for borders on a whole wall screen?

There are no Borders if the entire Wall is painted and the size / format in play is just shooting on to it.


Sinc most every screen I do is ALR-oriented, and usually a mid-to-dark shade of Gray, the Wall is "self Masking".


Even a PJ that shows a "grayish Format Bar" can suddenly have virtually Black Bars...because in truth the whole area surrounding the image looks...you guessed it...Black.


I can assure you, "Hokey" ain't in my vocabulary. "Jaw Droppin' Amazement" is more the case.

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan is offline  
post #30 of 37 Old 08-05-2018, 04:56 PM
DIY Granddad (w/help)
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 23,225
Mentioned: 372 Post(s)
Tagged: 6 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4277 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Send a message via Skype™ to MississippiMan
Proper's to steve1106,


.......who said essentially the same thing I did, giving two examples he is up close and personal to.


I tell ya sumpthin'.....On-Wall Format-less Projection is on the upswing, and gains momentum with every leap in Resolution and Contrast and Lumen Output that comes along....with each significant jump reducing the necessity of needing extreme ALR properties.



A 5000 Lumen PJ w/Native 60K:1 Contrast projecting a 4K Image onto a Light Gray .8 gain Wall can pretty much Zoom to provide an impeccable 180" 2.39:1 image (69" x 166")


Same Projector at the same settings would produce a 190" 16:9 image (166" x 93") Now there is a "Wall Screen".



At just under 8' high and 14' wide....................well that's crazy. I'd be GLAD to "settle" for Auto C.H.I. and a picayune 122" x 69" 16:9 (140" diagonal) if pressed.



(...Don't look now but a DLP Projector as described above is rapidly becoming a reality...)

"They said it couldn't be done. Well, we sure showed 'em otherwise!"
HAS Advanced Audio and Imaging Solutions...Audio Transducers & Projection Screen Coatings
MississippiMan 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