Bigger Screen VS Sitting Closer - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 16Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 41 Old 09-05-2019, 01:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 8,232
Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3732 Post(s)
Liked: 2962
^ The fewer the visible visual cues outside the screen image the more subtle the difference in perception of different size images viewed from different distances that fill the same field of vision. Technically our eyes can detect those subtle changes but in reality they might not be noticeable to many. Each person would need to conduct their own experiment to determine how sensitive they are to this issue.

Of course if you know in advance what size screen you're viewing and how far you're sitting from it before all the lights go out in an otherwise black room then it depends on how much you can suspend your logic to imagine that you're sitting further away from a bigger screen. It would take a blinded experiment being walked blindfolded into a room and not knowing in advance what setup you were viewing to learn how well you can differentiate screen size and viewing distance with no advance knowledge and no visual cues outside the screen image itself.
howiee likes this.
Dave in Green is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 41 Old 09-05-2019, 08:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,994
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1921
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
A 110" screen is 21% bigger than 100".

I went from a 50" to a 55" daytime TV, and while not dramatic, the difference is appreciable.
im just saying, i went from a 72" tall screen to a 65" tall screen and the difference was negligible.

i remember going from a 46" RPTV to a 50" plasma, and once compensating for foot closer to the wall the screen was, it was a clear difference as well. however, that's the point of the question. before compensating for that difference in viewing distance, i actually felt the 50" looked smaller.

so i stand by it, if you're allowed to move the viewing distance, a 100" vs 110" screen is completely within the range that moving closer can compensate for. i don't however, believe that you could ever find a viewing distance that makes a 50" image feel the same as a 100" image. there's too much change, and you would absolutely pick up on the change in viewing distance.

personally, i would tend to state that screen size is determined by viewing distance, rather than viewing distance is determined by screen size. if you build your room to the dimensions you want/need for the desired seating arrangement, then you'll be left with an idea of how big your screen needs to be. if you start off with your screen size, then there's really nothing to base it off of. is 120" big? 140"? in some cases that's huge, in others tiny. i just don't think it's fair to say that a 120" screen is bigger than a 110" screen (as ridiculous as that sounds, but when it's all said and done, a 110" screen can absolutely feel bigger in a small room than a 120" screen in a big room). so until you have your room size and seating distance, no size screen can be considered 'big' or 'small'

i mean in practice, you're going to go back and forth a bit, you can't always get the ideal screen size, so you might shoot for 2 rows and a 20' viewing distance, then realize you're projector can't fill a 150" screen, and start making adjustments.

ultimately, i don't think our eyes can do a good job of differentiating screen size based on FOV alone, but it's pretty easy to tell the difference in viewing distance(if it's significant). so if the FOV seems the same, but the viewing distance is much shorter, we can easily identify that as a smaller screen. If the FOV is similar, and viewing distance is similar, we might not be able to tell the difference.
markmon1 likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 09-05-2019 at 09:07 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #33 of 41 Old 09-05-2019, 08:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,994
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
^ The fewer the visible visual cues outside the screen image the more subtle the difference in perception of different size images viewed from different distances that fill the same field of vision. Technically our eyes can detect those subtle changes but in reality they might not be noticeable to many. Each person would need to conduct their own experiment to determine how sensitive they are to this issue.

Of course if you know in advance what size screen you're viewing and how far you're sitting from it before all the lights go out in an otherwise black room then it depends on how much you can suspend your logic to imagine that you're sitting further away from a bigger screen. It would take a blinded experiment being walked blindfolded into a room and not knowing in advance what setup you were viewing to learn how well you can differentiate screen size and viewing distance with no advance knowledge and no visual cues outside the screen image itself.
you're correct, but i'm also wondering why you ever bother to do this?

for purely argumentative reasons, and isolating the theory, sure. but in practice, would anybody EVER experience this in their theater? and if not, then i'd say the non-blind, 'messy' test would actually be a better representation of real world scenarios.

to me, it's the easiest thing in the world to sit your laptop or phone in front of you, and move it back and forth until it appears the same size as your tv. spend 5mins watching content on both and it's a very different experience.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 05:02 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,793
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2110 Post(s)
Liked: 1061
Quote:
Originally Posted by howiee View Post
This is an interesting topic and one that's been on my mind recently. In our last home setup we went through a bunch of grey and white screens - 92" - 100" - 110" - 120". Around 6 in total with differing viewing distances. The general progression was seats moving back and the screen getting bigger - and every size jump was an improvement to my eyes. This wasn't a dedicated room, which probably has an impact on perceived size, but either way the screen looked noticeably bigger with each leap and the experience was better for it. I suspect moving to 130"/140"/150" etc etc would yeild similar improvements. What i'm not sure about is whether this will be the case in a velvet batcave of nothing. In our new setup we want a main scope experience - possibly with the option to remove top and bottom masking for imax - and can't power one with the 16:9 size we're used to. It will likely drop to around 100-110". Still plenty big, but I remember the improvement when moving from 110" to 120" and am loathe to not have that in the new bells and whistles (and likely last) home cinema we build. In a batcave the difference betwen 100/110" and 120" may not be that noticeable, however. I'll probably end up caving the room once it's built and experiment with lost of different painted screens before settling and am hoping (it will save alot of money!) that the blacker the cinema the more we can fool the eyes into thinking the screen is bigger than it is.
As I said in all the above posts there are quite a few factors and one of them is our binocular vision. For me in a room devoid of visual clues and a fairly high immersion factor of around 1.5-2.0 x screen height = seating distance I see it happening right around the 110” mark with bigger of course being better.

As a side note the shape and size of the room can play a part. My first theater about 15 years ago was built in my farm house basement and the ceiling height was just 6’4”. Not knowing what I was doing and TV was still 4:3 I bought an XGA projector 4:3 and built a 120” 4:3 screen 6’x8’. So with just 2” from the floor and the ceiling it looked massive and compared to my 32” TV it was massive. I painted the whole room flat black and found TV too large at that size, but discovered IMAX movies the full version on DVD with the 4:3 AR and I bought almost all of them. Friends nicknamed my theater a mini IMAX.

Point being when sitting in that room and having some tells from the floor and ceiling it actually looked larger because the room was so short and the screen filled so much of it.

Even though my theater today in a different home is much better it is pretty hard to top that mini IMAX feeling.
howiee likes this.

Bud
bud16415 is online now  
post #35 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 05:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1842 Post(s)
Liked: 598
6’ ceilings?!? Were you living in the shire...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
howiee likes this.
JRock3x8 is online now  
post #36 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 06:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,793
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2110 Post(s)
Liked: 1061
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
6’ ceilings?!? Were you living in the shire...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LOL in the mid 1800s basements were dug by hand and walls were made from field stones so ether lack of muscle or lack of stones combined with a 6’ tall person was a giant that’s what they did. The room I used as a theater was actually a coal bunker.

Half the people called it the mini IMAX the other half called it the Hobbit Theater.

If you really want to be impressed in the 6’4” height I had seating for 12 and even a raiser for the second row. We were SPAM in the can.

Bud
bud16415 is online now  
post #37 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 06:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
DavidinGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 97
My 2 cents...

Fill the space with the largest screen that will fit (within reason of course) and once you're having to turn your head from side to side to see all the image you need to go just a touch smaller = perfect


I have a 150" and sit approximately 14ft and find it a perfect fit for my tastes.

--------------------------------------------------
Source: HTPC w/madVR, Video: Epson 5040, 150" 16:9, Audio: Onkyo RZ 830 avr, 5.1.4 Atmos setup. 5 speaker Energy C Series: L/R C300's, C C-C100, SR/SL C50's, 4 in-ceiling Micca R-8c. Subwoofer: MiniMarty um18 w/NX3000D.
DavidinGA is online now  
post #38 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 07:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 8,232
Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3732 Post(s)
Liked: 2962
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
you're correct, but i'm also wondering why you ever bother to do this?

for purely argumentative reasons, and isolating the theory, sure. but in practice, would anybody EVER experience this in their theater? and if not, then i'd say the non-blind, 'messy' test would actually be a better representation of real world scenarios.

to me, it's the easiest thing in the world to sit your laptop or phone in front of you, and move it back and forth until it appears the same size as your tv. spend 5mins watching content on both and it's a very different experience.
We're all just citing various examples to help anyone who might be interested in understanding the science behind the relative perception of screen size, viewing distance and FOV which is a subject that regularly comes up on this forum. In the specific case of the OP's original question the difference in screen size from 100" to 110" and minor adjustment in viewing distance is small enough to be barely noticeable if at all by most.

Each case is a little different with the specifics of the environment, individual viewer sensitivity and magnitude of screen size/viewing distance variation all playing a role in how noticeable the perceptual difference might be. The difference in screen size and relative viewing distance between a phone screen and a big screen TV would obviously be at the extreme end of the scale and wouldn't directly relate to relatively minor changes in projection screen size.

For those who might be interested, binocular vision is most effective at closer ranges and becomes less effective at distances beyond arm's length where our brains begin relying more on processing other visual cues. One example is motion parallax, which describes the effect when we move our heads slightly objects at different distances move at slightly different speeds.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #39 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 08:11 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 16,154
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6866 Post(s)
Liked: 8099
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
you're correct, but i'm also wondering why you ever bother to do this?

for purely argumentative reasons, and isolating the theory, sure. but in practice, would anybody EVER experience this in their theater? and if not, then i'd say the non-blind, 'messy' test would actually be a better representation of real world scenarios.

to me, it's the easiest thing in the world to sit your laptop or phone in front of you, and move it back and forth until it appears the same size as your tv. spend 5mins watching content on both and it's a very different experience.
The biggest difference is I can't seat 8 or 9 people in front of my phone for a 3 hour movie !

To me the screen size is just one part of theater design. I absolutely have to have a separate projector closet so I don't see or hear the projector. Seems to me most people I talk to are limited screen size wise by their throw distance. I know I am.
Craig Peer is online now  
post #40 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 10:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1842 Post(s)
Liked: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
The biggest difference is I can't seat 8 or 9 people in front of my phone for a 3 hour movie !



To me the screen size is just one part of theater design. I absolutely have to have a separate projector closet so I don't see or hear the projector. Seems to me most people I talk to are limited screen size wise by their throw distance. I know I am.


That’s what benq pjs are for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JRock3x8 is online now  
post #41 of 41 Old 09-06-2019, 12:02 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 16,154
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6866 Post(s)
Liked: 8099
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
That’s what benq pjs are for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry - the contrast and black levels on a BenQ would look terrible in my blacked out theater. It's all about the picture on the screen - everything else is secondary.
Craig Peer is online now  
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