Originally Posted by Travis Reed
I appreciate all the advice. I will try and pick up a cheap projector or borrow one. I think my boss got one for outside movies.
I hear ya, seems like this is the never ending debate on this forum. It just did not make sense to me for my favorite action packed movies to be smaller than 1.78 TV content. I believe it was also not the artist's/filmmakers intent to have their movies watched on smaller TV but rather wider. If you switch from 1.78 show to a 2.35 movie, the curtains should open more for a bigger screen, not reduce image size with bars on top and bottom like our conventional TVs.
I was also told that a 150" 1.78 screen is more fatiguing than a 150" 2.35 screen since our eyes run out of height well before width since they are beside each other. If this is true, it further makes since to watch 2.35 content on bigger diagonal than 1.78.
This is just info I researched that seemed to make sense with no experience though. My mind may completely change when I test out screen sizes.
No one has ever suggested that you watch your favorite action packed scope movie smaller than a 1.77:1 TV content. It is often stated in reverse telling people that 2.35:1 CIH is better because you don’t want to watch an action packed movie smaller than TV. We are talking about presentation here and you have the idea there is only two methods of presentation CIH and CIW. There are many more methods that are well established one being CIA constant image area and another CIH+IMAX constant image height plus IMAX. These other 2 methods are or were on the fringe because CIH and CIW require 2way masking and CIA and CIH+IMAX require 4way masking.
Some people doing CIH+IMAX have hard semi permanent top and bottom masking they run their theater day in and day out as CIH then when a spectacular new movie come out in IMAX or an AR changing blockbuster that changes between scope and IMAX, they simply pull off the semi permanent masking panels, maybe a 5 minute job and then get to watch something even more spectacular than even a scope movie.
I proposed a new 5th method of presentation I called PIA personal image area. It uses a screen sized for IMAX as in CIH+IMAX mentioned above. This assumes IMAX will be the largest format there is at this time so why have a screen larger than that. Everything else fits inside that. If masking is important to you then you have two options the first being fully automatic 4way masking fast and expensive. the second is manual 4way masking slow and inexpensive. Now there is a third method and what I like along with a few others who are too busy enjoying their theaters to be here talking about it. modern projectors are producing some pretty good CRs /blacks these days and there are some screens that are dark gray/”black” in color and when paired with a proper projector black bars are little to no problem. This is called self-masking and works at the speed of light and cost zero.
There seems to be an unwillingness to watch anything projected without black picture frame all around the image. It is reported here that to do so the image is virtually imposable to watch. But then again millions of people went and watched any number of the IMAX AR and AR changing movies like The Last Knight, Dunkirk, Aquman, The Grand Budapest Hotel, and the list goes on without even noticing that half the time the image wasn’t fully masked. The only people I know that noticed are fans of theater presentation and were watching for it because they knew it was there. I would even further say in doing so they spoiled the movie for themselves rather than what they normally say the effect spoiled the movie for them.
Take some time and completely understand presentation methods. Otherwise people are offering advice that’s being misunderstood.