PROs and CONs projector screen SIZE - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
  • 1 Post By m0j0
  • 1 Post By bud16415
  • 1 Post By descalabro
  • 1 Post By dbpaddler
  • 1 Post By descalabro
  • 1 Post By bud16415
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 10:19 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
the7mcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 205
PROs and CONs projector screen SIZE

Okay so I know that typically and generally speaking the trend for most of us is to go towards bigger and increasing...

I mean my TV purchasing history has gone like this
32in -> 47in -> 65in and next TV I buy will be either a 75inch or 85inch display set

I just got my first projector a few months ago and started off with a cheap 110 inch screen for $130 to test things out and it seems like that’s biggest size I can accommodate for my room.

I’m trying to buy a better screen in the next few months in the $300 - $500 range and I’m struggling internally battling that instinct built over the years justifying paying more AND also shrinking down in size.

So for those of you that have shrunk their screen size down what has been the benefit? For one I know that a smaller screen provides better lumens brightness since the projector isn’t trying to fill up a bigger area right?

And one can always move closer to screen negate the fact that details in resolution can be lost with decrease in screen size...

I started off with this screen

https://www.amazon.com/Homegear-110-...0+inch+&sr=8-4



Surprisingly for the price it has been better than I can imagine but it’s my first screen so I have nothing to compare it to, but once I have more experience with other screens then I can accurately retrospectively form a more accurate review of it, taking its prices into the equation as well.

The screen I’m looking at Among a few others is this one which to me seem so like it’ll be a good mid tier screen to upgrade to since it is tab tensioned as I can’t currently do fixes frames in my set up. But I’ll be losing out on 10 inches.


https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07HT7XX9M...lig_dp_it&th=1




But then I’m also thinking about how something like this would fair against what I’m currently using and the above tab tensioned screen since is an Elite screen and those tend to be well considered and respected around here

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000Y...TF8&psc=1&th=1
the7mcs is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 10:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
m0j0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,147
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Liked: 363
You may want to check out Silver Ticket screens. They are pretty well known and allow for a very nice image but on a budget.


https://www.silverticketproducts.com...12894310137936
tonybradley likes this.
m0j0 is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 05:06 PM
Senior Member
 
dbpaddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 351
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Also check out open box from Elite. Save about $100 on my Sable 2. And I can't imagine going smaller. It was my sister going to 75" in her family room that had me come home to my 100" screen and thought I really do need to go bigger. And now I'm comfy at 120". But I think I'd go even bigger since I could have wider aspect ratios reach wall to wall. But a bit of a pain when zoom and focus is manual.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
dbpaddler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 05:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 765
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 257
I find a 145" 16x9 screen to be too small, even from ~12ft viewing distance.

Fixed screens are also a PITA so, IMHO, a painted screen in the way to go, or go for a fixed screen that's larger than you need to allow for future expansion, and mask it down, if desired, for present use.
DunMunro is online now  
post #5 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 07:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,497
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1988 Post(s)
Liked: 1005
The questions / debates around screen size and seating distance have been going on for years and will still be going on as long as there are projectors.

The term immersion is commonly used and we know it changes from person to person and I even think it changes for a given person depending on what kind of content it is.

IMAX movies on BD are the 1.89 AR cut or put on BD as 16:9 or 1.77 AR. These movies are very close in AR to flat movies filmed as 1.85 AR.

1.89 IMAX, 1.77 TV, 1.85 Flat movies are all about the same shape but should be watched at far different immersion levels to get max benefits from what the director intended.

But it doesn’t stop at immersion because watching a 100” image from 10’ is a different experience than a 200” image from 20’. Or look at it as holding a cell phone a few inches from your face and expecting it to be like IMAX.

We have two eyes and we have depth perception and perception of size of the world around us. We can’t make a 8 story high screen at home so we can never truly experience IMAX at home.

We can on the other hand get kind of a feeling of something more than TV will ever be with a projector and screen and a dark room. I think it takes a certain size minimum screen and a certain immersion level and when you put that in a room where the only thing in your vision is the screen and all the rest is black, you can trick yourself that the experience is movie theater like. For me the screen threshold is a screen of around 120” and for IMAX a seating distance around 1.5 times the height of the screen. For Scope and Flat movies a seating distance of about 2 times the height of the screen. I wish I could have a 120” screen but 110” is the largest my room now allows with the same relative immersions and 110” is good enough.

IMO when TVs that we can afford get to 110”-120” they will have a chance at breaking into a movie like experience. Of course if you have a large room and can do it bigger is even better.
descalabro likes this.

Bud
bud16415 is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 05-25-2019, 08:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
descalabro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 143
I have a cheap roll down screen too. 107" of viewable area, about the same price as yours. It isn't perfectly flat, but the areas where there's a slight tendency to be wavy are near the edges so it doesn't pose much of a problem. I'll get a tensioned one next time, for sure.

As for your question about size, I think that by the answers so far you can tell it's very subjective. In my small room, I sit at 8.69ft (2,65m) from my screen, and I would definitely not want a larger screen at this distance. I like to get at least a good sense of the screen's edges and, most importantly, a comfortable view of about 70% of the screen.

However, there is one variable that can dramatically change the way we feel about having a huge screen inside a room: room treatment. Having a big screen reflecting bright light all over the room can be as overwhelming as the screen size itself, but in a bad way. The nearer the screen edges are to the walls, the worse it gets. So I would say to consider darkening at least the area around the screen if you want to fill the whole room with your screen. After I did this, the screen felt smaller, but it became much more natural to be immersed in it without the distracting and tiresome haze of brightness on the walls and ceiling all around the screen, not to mention the actual improvements on the image.
bud16415 likes this.
descalabro is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 12:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rekbones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somers, CT
Posts: 2,897
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 917 Post(s)
Liked: 480
One solution to your question is simply to zoom your image down by 10" on your current screen and see if you like it. And yes a tab tensioned screen would be the next logical upgrade.

"Smart enough to know better, to old to care" ------ Dedicated Bat Cave Home Theater, JVC RS49U/Mitsubishi HC7900DW Projector, 110" 16:9 Jamestown screen with variable power masking for CIW 2.50:1 to 16:9, Marantz 7009 with 7.1.4 Atmos with Ohm mains,3 DIY Subs (2 15" (1 ported, 1 sealed and a 12" 4th order bandpass), 1 DIY butt kicker, Custom Built HTPC, 18TB DroboFS NAS
rekbones is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 10:31 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
the7mcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0j0 View Post
You may want to check out Silver Ticket screens. They are pretty well known and allow for a very nice image but on a budget.


https://www.silverticketproducts.com...12894310137936
thank you!
Saved the page
the7mcs is online now  
post #9 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 10:31 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
the7mcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
I find a 145" 16x9 screen to be too small, even from ~12ft viewing distance.

Fixed screens are also a PITA so, IMHO, a painted screen in the way to go, or go for a fixed screen that's larger than you need to allow for future expansion, and mask it down, if desired, for present use.
how so?
the7mcs is online now  
post #10 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 10:34 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
the7mcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by descalabro View Post
I have a cheap roll down screen too. 107" of viewable area, about the same price as yours. It isn't perfectly flat, but the areas where there's a slight tendency to be wavy are near the edges so it doesn't pose much of a problem. I'll get a tensioned one next time, for sure.

As for your question about size, I think that by the answers so far you can tell it's very subjective. In my small room, I sit at 8.69ft (2,65m) from my screen, and I would definitely not want a larger screen at this distance. I like to get at least a good sense of the screen's edges and, most importantly, a comfortable view of about 70% of the screen.

However, there is one variable that can dramatically change the way we feel about having a huge screen inside a room: room treatment. Having a big screen reflecting bright light all over the room can be as overwhelming as the screen size itself, but in a bad way. The nearer the screen edges are to the walls, the worse it gets. So I would say to consider darkening at least the area around the screen if you want to fill the whole room with your screen. After I did this, the screen felt smaller, but it became much more natural to be immersed in it without the distracting and tiresome haze of brightness on the walls and ceiling all around the screen, not to mention the actual improvements on the image.
If you get the tensioned one will you wanna get something bigger or would you easily settle for something smaller in the 100in size or even smaller than that seeing as that can be like $300-$400
the7mcs is online now  
post #11 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 10:55 AM
Senior Member
 
dbpaddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 351
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekbones View Post
One solution to your question is simply to zoom your image down by 10" on your current screen and see if you like it. And yes a tab tensioned screen would be the next logical upgrade.
I'd definitely do that first and give it a week or two so you give it its fair shake to see if you enjoy watching at that size. Watch a few movies with wider aspect ratio and watch some TV at 16:9. Then decide.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
dbpaddler is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 11:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 765
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by the7mcs View Post
how so?
A 145in 16 x 9 diagonal image seen from 12ft is simply not large enough for all the detail in a 4K image to be seen and resolved clearly (from experience) and my experience mirrors this chart almost exactly:

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

A fixed screen requires a lot more work to square up the PJ and the screen and leads to less flexible installation requirements. Minor imperfections such as a tiny amount of vertical keystoning, can be unnoticeable with a painted screen, but are painfully obvious with a fixed screen. A painted screen can cover an entire wall, and can simply appear as an accent wall when the PJ is not in use, and it's easy to add another PJ and/or set one up on a temporary basis for testing.
DunMunro is online now  
post #13 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 11:55 AM
Senior Member
 
dbpaddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 351
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
A 145in 16 x 9 diagonal image seen from 12ft is simply not large enough for all the detail in a 4K image to be seen and resolved clearly (from experience) and my experience mirrors this chart almost exactly:



http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html



A fixed screen requires a lot more work to square up the PJ and the screen and leads to less flexible installation requirements. Minor imperfections such as a tiny amount of vertical keystoning, can be unnoticeable with a painted screen, but are painfully obvious with a fixed screen. A painted screen can cover an entire wall, and can simply appear as an accent wall when the PJ is not in use, and it's easy to add another PJ and/or set one up on a temporary basis for testing.
Since when is resolution the only benefit of going 4k. Better yet, since when is resolution the primary attribute of image quality? Or are we just ignoring the other attributes in the argument of screen size?

And how many times do you have to set up your screen to really worry about setup being a hassle? Last I checked it was once. Most I know are simply setting up their pj and screen once and then enjoying it.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
Craig Peer likes this.

Last edited by dbpaddler; 05-26-2019 at 12:02 PM.
dbpaddler is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 01:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 765
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbpaddler View Post
Since when is resolution the only benefit of going 4k. Better yet, since when is resolution the primary attribute of image quality? Or are we just ignoring the other attributes in the argument of screen size?

And how many times do you have to set up your screen to really worry about setup being a hassle? Last I checked it was once. Most I know are simply setting up their pj and screen once and then enjoying it.

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
I recently acquired a 4K projector and I can test it easily since I have an entire wall to work with and I have lots of latitude for placement when I get around to ceiling mounting it. If I keep it I will have two ceiling mounted PJs, side by side, and I will use the PJ best suited for the content I intend to view. Yes, HDR is another benefit of 4K PJs but being able to see all the increased resolution is nice to be able to do, since I have the option to get a non-4K HDR PJ.

Last edited by DunMunro; 05-26-2019 at 01:34 PM.
DunMunro is online now  
post #15 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 08:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
descalabro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by the7mcs View Post
If you get the tensioned one will you wanna get something bigger or would you easily settle for something smaller in the 100in size or even smaller than that seeing as that can be like $300-$400


I will try to get one the same size I already have, since I’ve got no more space for a bigger one anyway, and the JVC X7 that I recently bought isn’t bright enough for larger screens. Look, I enjoy large screens but I feel that from a certain size and up it’s mostly a matter of taste. 107” from 8,5’ distance is large enough for me. And I don’t buy this “seating closer or going bigger because the projector is 4K and you can better enjoy detail” argument. That’s just not the way I watch a movie, and certainly isn’t the way most directors think when they make a movie. I f it’s detail they want, they’ll use an extreme close-up shot. The first time I sat in front a large 1080p TV I felt strangely nauseated and tired looking at all the facial skin detail of actors. And nowadays, when so much of movies is CGI, I really don’t want that much detail in most situations. For example, CGI smoke, fog and water look clearly fake most of the times, and a huge 4K image doesn’t help in this regard. That’s not the kind of movies I most enjoy, anyway, except for sci-fi (by the way, no, Guardians of the Galaxy isn’t sci-fi), and even for sci-fi I feel that 1080p on a 100” is plenty. The same goes for the HDR and color space discussions: sure, it’s good that projectors are getting closer and closer to becoming technically accurate professional image devices, but most of those discussions are measurements and numbers, and again, that’s just not why not how I see movies. All I need is a well balanced image and a basic surround system, my perception will do the rest. Sorry for the long post, it just seems to me that this screen size question depends mostly on what you really enjoy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bud16415 likes this.
descalabro is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 05-26-2019, 09:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,497
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1988 Post(s)
Liked: 1005
Quote:
Originally Posted by descalabro View Post
I will try to get one the same size I already have, since I’ve got no more space for a bigger one anyway, and the JVC X7 that I recently bought isn’t bright enough for larger screens. Look, I enjoy large screens but I feel that from a certain size and up it’s mostly a matter of taste. 107” from 8,5’ distance is large enough for me. And I don’t buy this “seating closer or going bigger because the projector is 4K and you can better enjoy detail” argument. That’s just not the way I watch a movie, and certainly isn’t the way most directors think when they make a movie. I f it’s detail they want, they’ll use an extreme close-up shot. The first time I sat in front a large 1080p TV I felt strangely nauseated and tired looking at all the facial skin detail of actors. And nowadays, when so much of movies is CGI, I really don’t want that much detail in most situations. For example, CGI smoke, fog and water look clearly fake most of the times, and a huge 4K image doesn’t help in this regard. That’s not the kind of movies I most enjoy, anyway, except for sci-fi (by the way, no, Guardians of the Galaxy isn’t sci-fi), and even for sci-fi I feel that 1080p on a 100” is plenty. The same goes for the HDR and color space discussions: sure, it’s good that projectors are getting closer and closer to becoming technically accurate professional image devices, but most of those discussions are measurements and numbers, and again, that’s just not why not how I see movies. All I need is a well balanced image and a basic surround system, my perception will do the rest. Sorry for the long post, it just seems to me that this screen size question depends mostly on what you really enjoy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I want to strongly agree with your post. There was a time in the early days of FP with 480 and even 720 resolution people selected immersion with an eye on what point will it be as big as I like but not get to a point the resolution was a negative on PQ. With 1080p an awful lot of people had a resolution that supported a totally good enough PQ for as immersive viewing as they would ever like. That doesn’t mean 4k wont produce an improvement in PQ over 1080p just that they will never want to sit closer just because they can. Sure there are people that 1080p limited but IMO they are not the vast number of people.

It is hard to say as with time and ever improving resolution I slowly liked greater immersion, but I have found the content and the cinematography play more of a roll than the resolution. As an example movies intended to play in both scope theaters and IMAX venues when I watch the IMAX version I can tolerate and even enjoy that level of immersion I could never stand with a 1.85 flat movie 4k or not.

I have most of the original 1.44 IMAX science and nature movies I bought years ago on crummy DVD format. We thought it was great at the time. we used to watch them with a XGA projector as immersive as we could stand based on the resolution and the upscale. I even watched them beyond the resolution sometimes well into pixel peeking range because the cinematography allowed it. It was fun. I wish they made BD versions of them still in that AR but they are now cropped to 16:9 even the newly mastered UHD BDs.

Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. My screen at 8’ seating distance like yours max out at 110”. Perfect for scope and the new IMAX movies and zoomed to 90” is great for flat movies and much of TV 80” or less. They are by no means small at that distance.

Based on all this my 4k desire is not so strong to upgrade. Sure I will with the next projector. I still buy BD not buying DVD any longer. BD is really good enough actually more than good enough for me still.
descalabro likes this.

Bud
bud16415 is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 05-27-2019, 10:55 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 15,705
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6577 Post(s)
Liked: 7604
Quote:
Originally Posted by the7mcs View Post
Okay so I know that typically and generally speaking the trend for most of us is to go towards bigger and increasing...

I mean my TV purchasing history has gone like this
32in -> 47in -> 65in and next TV I buy will be either a 75inch or 85inch display set

I just got my first projector a few months ago and started off with a cheap 110 inch screen for $130 to test things out and it seems like that’s biggest size I can accommodate for my room.

I’m trying to buy a better screen in the next few months in the $300 - $500 range and I’m struggling internally battling that instinct built over the years justifying paying more AND also shrinking down in size.

So for those of you that have shrunk their screen size down what has been the benefit? For one I know that a smaller screen provides better lumens brightness since the projector isn’t trying to fill up a bigger area right?

And one can always move closer to screen negate the fact that details in resolution can be lost with decrease in screen size...
I started with a free 120" diagonal 16:9 electric screen off a construction site 17 years ago. I still have a 120" diagonal 16:9 electric screen ( a Stewart Cima Neve ), but added a wider 128" diagonal 2.35:1 electric screen quite a few years ago. As resolution and picture quality have increased, I've moved the seating closer and closer ( a 14' wide sectional sofa ) - currently at 9' 8" from the 2.35:1 screen, and about 10' from the 16:9 screen. One advantage of not going too large screen wise is you can have a much brighter picture. I've currently got around 47 foot lamberts for 4K HDR on the scope screen - like a giant flat panel ! 100" - 110" is not too big. I wouldn't go smaller.
Craig Peer 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