Official JVC RS3000/NX9 - JVC RS2000/NX7/N7 - JVC RS1000/NX5/N5 - Owners Thread - Page 749 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 21064Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #22441 of 23719 Old 01-21-2020, 09:01 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLCPhoto View Post
The throw distance will work for the screen size and type you're considering. I'll leave it to others to estimate brightness.

One question, though: you say you'd be using a 0.8 gain screen since you're doing this in a living room. I'm not understanding the rationale here - why not use a higher gain screen to get a bit more brightness? Is going to be Acoustically Transparent (but even then there are options to go a little higher).
Thanks for posting.

Yes, I have a pretty good understanding of the throw, sadly I'll be at the far end of the zoom and throw, hurts brightness, I know, but can't really position it closer.

About my screen choice, 0.8 gain is simply due to the fact that it's an ALR screen and it comes with 0.8 gain, nothing more complicated.

It's comparable to Slate 0.8, I wouldn't want to go with Slate 1.2 because I'm afraid to elevate blacks.

You have screens which are higher gains but preserve black level, such as the Black Diamond or Phantom HALR from Stewarts.

I have a sample of Phantom HALR at home, it delivers a 1.0 gain and great blacks, but it has a half gain angle of 30 degrees, that's pretty steep, not one single seat in my theater can use that 1.0 gain because no seat is placed in the sweet spot. Seats are fixed.

The 0.8 gain material has a much wider viewing cone, eliminating the issue.

Black Diamond seem to introduce a blue tint to the picture, how do you even calibrate that?

If you have a better screen recommendation, feel free.

I sometimes think about putting a white screen in there, but then again it's a living room and yes - probably not the right thing to do.

What did you mean by going with an AT screen?


Maybe I should go with this screen, would probably be amazing with HDR.

https://youtu.be/EtIhq5-UNBk

The small sample is the $6,000 Phantom HALR 1.0 gain, 30 degree half gain angle, giving some of my seats a 0.4 to 0.6 gain experience, the screen would be very uneven in its brightness, seeing the screen is wide.

The big screen, the reference screen, is a material from the french Xtrem Screen, it's 1.34 gain with a massive viewing angle, as you can see, blows the Phantom HALR to bits, even in contrast it seems.

Best part is, it's $4,500 less!

Yes, it's an ALR screen, it has a black level of a 0.9 gain screen.

It seems ideal for HDR, maybe I could turn the lamp to low and close the iris for SDR?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
My screen is 45" tall, 2.40 aspect ratio and 0.8 gain. I have RS3000 at short end of throw. I currently use a DCR lens, but did ues lens memory for a little while. For HDR you will need high lamp. For SDR you can use low lamp. Even in high lamp you will be brightness challenged for HDR. You will be around 22FL. That is just barely bright enough for HDR with a fresh lamp. The low gain and the long throw are really hurting you.
Wow, thanks Mike!

We seem to be having a similar screen size then, great, I could not of asked for a better person to come with the relevant experience.

Thanks for calculating my brightness, I have some questions though.

How did you come up with 22FL, which calculator did you use?

How many calibrated lumens did you account for?

How many FL would I get with the above 1.34 gain screen?

How many FL did you get with lens memory, if you recall?

What's your FL with the DCR lens?

Thanks a lot!

Last edited by Vitus4K; 01-21-2020 at 11:45 PM.
Vitus4K is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22442 of 23719 Old 01-21-2020, 10:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 25,433
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7138 Post(s)
Liked: 7178
Quote:
Originally Posted by asharma View Post
From running high lamp???
The comment I made was a general comment about projectors, not specifically meant for the JVC.........

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake View Post
Or build a hush box
Yep, and if you a semi handy person they are pretty easy to build
asharma likes this.
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
post #22443 of 23719 Old 01-21-2020, 11:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by asharma View Post
Great info!!! How big is the room and what is your throw distance? IS it 100 percent velvet?
My room is about 12.5’ x 17’ and my throw distance is close to minimum at around 14.5’. My walls and ceiling are covered in triple black velvet, the carpet is Masland Panache black and the seating is black velvet as well. I only wear black clothes too
asharma and howiee like this.
azkino is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22444 of 23719 Old 01-21-2020, 11:35 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post
Have you tried it on high for a few movies though?
I'm running a 135", 1.3 Severtson and the difference between low and high is pretty drastic. With HDR in low lamp, it feels like it's doing next to nothing. Switch the same scene to high and it's really different.

From the sounds of it, the 2 main reasons people use the low lamp are cost of the lamp and noise, rather than affecting the pq in any way.
I mean, you'd just calibrate it in high mode at the end of the day, that's how I had it done.
The noise level is not acceptable for me in high lamp mode so that’s the reason I don’t use it. I don’t think I’ve watched a whole movie in high lamp mode yet but when I did try it, the difference wasn’t big enough for me. It’s been a while since I’ve tried it so maybe I’ll check it out again.
azkino is offline  
post #22445 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 12:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,154
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 966 Post(s)
Liked: 635
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post
Have you tried it on high for a few movies though?

I'm running a 135", 1.3 Severtson and the difference between low and high is pretty drastic. With HDR in low lamp, it feels like it's doing next to nothing. Switch the same scene to high and it's really different.



From the sounds of it, the 2 main reasons people use the low lamp are cost of the lamp and noise, rather than affecting the pq in any way.

I mean, you'd just calibrate it in high mode at the end of the day, that's how I had it done.


I’ve tried mine in high. I prefer the deeper black level in low bulb.

I have no worry about buying bulbs (can get for $130) or fan noise (have sound dampening around my projector).

I just think it looks better in low bulb mode and it’s plenty bright on my 140” 1.1 gain white screen with madVR HDR.

I will switch to high when low has dimmed too much but it’s still going strong at 260 hours so far.
SirMaster is online now  
post #22446 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 01:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
jake51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 757
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked: 74
The N5 is big, heavy and expensive
I would hate to have it drop down from the wall mount (it is ten pounds heavier than my RS400, I'm already worried that's gonna drop on my head as I'm directly underneath it)
So I've been thinking to place the N5 on a tall table in front of the chairs
My screen is 110 inches wide
What is the minimum distance to fill the screen?

Last edited by jake51; 01-22-2020 at 04:34 AM.
jake51 is offline  
post #22447 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 04:07 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Thanks for posting.
Yes, I have a pretty good understanding of the throw, sadly I'll be at the far end of the zoom and throw, hurts brightness, I know, but can't really position it closer.
His numbers are right, you are going to be a bit low. That said, if you have a dark living room or the side-walls and ceiling are far enough from the screen, I think you can get away with it, but it's bordering on non-optimal (mainly after the lamp ages). You'll need to use more aggressive settings on the HDR, and even for SDR you may eventually have to use a gamma curve at the brighter end of the range after your lamp ages.

You said you are in a living room, so in that case I'm assuming you have some reflections near the screen. However, if you have a high ceiling and side walls are far away, and a dark rug, that would help. Otherwise, going to be a bit dim looking.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --

Last edited by coderguy; 01-22-2020 at 04:12 AM.
coderguy is offline  
post #22448 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 04:57 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
His numbers are right, you are going to be a bit low. That said, if you have a dark living room or the side-walls and ceiling are far enough from the screen, I think you can get away with it, but it's bordering on non-optimal (mainly after the lamp ages). You'll need to use more aggressive settings on the HDR, and even for SDR you may eventually have to use a gamma curve at the brighter end of the range after your lamp ages.

You said you are in a living room, so in that case I'm assuming you have some reflections near the screen. However, if you have a high ceiling and side walls are far away, and a dark rug, that would help. Otherwise, going to be a bit dim looking.

I don't think it's a smart idea going with a white material, I have 25 inches to my white ceiling, 25 inches to a waxed hardwood floor.

However, there are dark gray bass traps in the corners next to the screen, basically preventing any reflections from the sides, below my screen is also a white center speaker.

ALR is my only bet, I would assume.


You're mentioning that I will be a bit dim, do you have any good calculator that you can recommend using when calculating brightness?

I have an option to use a 1.34 gain screen with black levels of a 0.9 material, instead of going with the dimmer 0.8 option mentioned earlier.

If a 0.8 gain material gives me 22FL, I am very interested in finding out what a 1.34 gain material yields.


Thank you for all your help!
Vitus4K is offline  
post #22449 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 05:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DLCPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1767 Post(s)
Liked: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
About my screen choice, 0.8 gain is simply due to the fact that it's an ALR screen and it comes with 0.8 gain, nothing more complicated.

What did you mean by going with an AT screen?
Gotcha. Your post just said it was your living room, so it wasn't clear what the specific reason was for the low gain screen; hence the question, which you've answered.

An "AT" screen is Acoustically Transparent, used when speakers are being placed behind the screen. There is typically a gain penalty for this type of screen.


As for the rest of the post, you seem to have a good grasp of the variables involved. Bottom line is that there is no perfect screen, that will check all the boxes for any given installation scenario.

Increase the gain, decrease the viewing angle, but improve the picture for HDR. If you have seating far enough to the sides, and these are consistently used, this obviously is a factor. If they're rarely used, and most of the time, viewers will be at an acceptable angle, this would be less of a consideration.

As for impact on Black levels, you'd have to decide if this impact would be visible enough to offset the overall gain in brightness of the image, and better suitability for HDR. Getting screen samples, while they're typically not large enough to fully assess what they'd look like, will give you some clues. I'm inclined to think that the improvement in overall 'pop' of the image from added brightness would be more of a positive than whatever loss in black levels there might be (which might only be apparent in an A/B comparison). But that is a subjective call, and people can have different valid opinions.

All tough choices, with no right or wrong answers. Good luck!
skylarlove1999 likes this.

JVC NX7, DCR Lens, Marantz SR7010, Screen Innovations 160" 2.35:1 Screen
Front L/R: Duntech Sovereigns, powered by 2 bridged Adcom GFA-555
Center: Revel C208 powered by Cambridge Audio Azur 851W
Dolby Bed (4): Sony Core SS-CS5, Atmos (4): Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE
Subwoofer: DIY 8' sub with 4 18" SI Drivers, powered by iNuke 6000
DLCPhoto is online now  
post #22450 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 06:22 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommarra View Post
I few of us - e.g., @markmon1 are using the ethernet cable and MadVR to automatically change lens memories and picture mode depending on the content.

On my setup, I detect the Aspect ratio, Color space (HDR, BT2020, or Rec.709) and use it to automatically change the Lens Memory (16:9 and Scope w/ Zoom), and select the right Picture profile (Standard Rec 709, HDR with high lamp and color filter off, or SDR)

It takes away the pain of finding the remote and changing the lens memory or picture profile - makes for a truly plug and play model.

May I ask how you do this "detection" because to me it is unclear based on what you'd determine that. Does this work for both your Kodi and your MadVR HTPC?
I'm sorry if this is not quite on the thread topic itself but I can imagine that problem must occur especially to owners of 4K JVCs because one wants to use as much of the native panel as possible specific to movie aspect. Movie metadata is not always reliable so detection based on that would be somewhat flawed.
Flashini is offline  
post #22451 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 06:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
I have an option to use a 1.34 gain screen with black levels of a 0.9 material, instead of going with the dimmer 0.8 option mentioned earlier.
Keep in mind that most screens do not tell you their true gain, the manufacturers make up the numbers, sometimes they are correct, but often are not. You have to do a bit of research to know the real gain of any given screen. I would look at the Epson 5050/6050, it's a better match for your setup. If you are dead set on a JVC, then I would either consider the A-lens option to get that additional brightness, or I would pay an interior decorator to try to help you figure out some type of ceiling transformation, possibly even a dark wood paneling above the screen (no idea, cannot picture a room I've never seen).

Optimally an ALR screen with an Epson is a better bet.

All the above said, some of this depends on personal preferences, you might do ok with the setup and a JVC, it may be good enough for you. There is a level of subjectivity involved here, so none of us can say for sure, plus it's not really possible to be precise without having tested a particular room.

Higher gain White vs. lower-gain ALR screen is a compromise, but the ALR screen is the better choice in a room like that with a bright enough projector, as long as you get a good ALR screen. With a dimmer projector, cannot say as too many variables and room factors involved.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #22452 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 07:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,435
Mentioned: 276 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13160 Post(s)
Liked: 10793
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
A low gain screen can improve the contrast ratio in a non-ideal viewing environment.
Old thread, but interesting read. Pay particular attention to darinP2's posts. I would consider Darin one of the best experts with contrast.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...ast-ratio.html
rjmcinnis likes this.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 01-22-2020 at 07:18 AM.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #22453 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 07:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 7,790
Mentioned: 162 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5537 Post(s)
Liked: 2232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Old thread, but interesting read. Pay particular attention to darinP2's posts. I would consider Darin one of the best experts with contrast.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...ast-ratio.html
A low gain screen cannot improve a projector’s full on /full off contrast as that’s determined by the laws of physics. However, it can improve the contrast if the limiting factor is the viewing environment.
Dominic Chan is online now  
post #22454 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 07:51 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
Old post, but haven't thought about contrast deeply in years.

It can help retain the ANSI contrast some, but it's hard to know what screen for what room when talking imperfect rooms, because raising brightness can improve perceived contrast even though by doing so in using a uniform gain screen, this screen may hurt ANSI compared to any screen that has non-uniform or ALR projection type setups. So in a bad room, contrast measurements aren't even the key necessarily, if the contrast is too bad, then brightness is the key, because no matter what you do, it's always easier to gain extra brightness than it is extra contrast in a bad room (hence with a bright projector).

For instance, if you had a projector with a very old bulb doing 100 lumens in a bat cave, you are going to have a hard time seeing the proper contrast in bright scenes, but the On/Off contrast is still the same. When talking bad rooms, the calculation gets all crazy at all different levels.

So there is a fallible relationship between brightness, darkness, and contrast as far as how the eye receives it at different lumens levels. That's why I cannot really answer the question of which screen for a bad room. In the old days, I would just say the HP screen, you're amp'n the brightness so much, that even if I was wrong, I'm not that wrong.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --

Last edited by coderguy; 01-22-2020 at 08:10 AM.
coderguy is offline  
post #22455 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 08:11 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
I would just point people to the screen forums and see what others found most helpful, because it's hard to say.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #22456 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 08:12 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,435
Mentioned: 276 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13160 Post(s)
Liked: 10793
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
A low gain screen cannot improve a projector’s full on /full off contrast as that’s determined by the laws of physics. However, it can improve the contrast if the limiting factor is the viewing environment.
I posted the link, more so for people that would not quite understand what you were saying and think that an ALR screen always improves contrast.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #22457 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 08:19 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
If I were to rewrite that post today, I would shorten it and explain it differently, but some of it was on-target. The problem when picking a screen is we're dealing with too many variables --- brightness, contrast, reflections, subjective optimal lumens --- all in an unknown room...
tigerhonaker likes this.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #22458 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:03 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,302
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7599 Post(s)
Liked: 9372
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake51 View Post
The N5 is big, heavy and expensive
I would hate to have it drop down from the wall mount (it is ten pounds heavier than my RS400, I'm already worried that's gonna drop on my head as I'm directly underneath it)
So I've been thinking to place the N5 on a tall table in front of the chairs
My screen is 110 inches wide
What is the minimum distance to fill the screen?
See here - http://pro.jvc.com/pro/lens_calc/HTML/jvc_REF.html
Craig Peer is online now  
post #22459 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:04 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLCPhoto View Post
As for impact on Black levels, you'd have to decide if this impact would be visible enough to offset the overall gain in brightness of the image, and better suitability for HDR. Getting screen samples, while they're typically not large enough to fully assess what they'd look like, will give you some clues. I'm inclined to think that the improvement in overall 'pop' of the image from added brightness would be more of a positive than whatever loss in black levels there might be (which might only be apparent in an A/B comparison).

Yes, this is an interesting topic, I think my long throw can increase the perceived black level somewhat, due to the fact that the light has a long way to travel, correct or not?

In that very regard, going with a screen that yields more pop, could be beneficial, otherwise an already dim screen would make the final image too dim, as many of you pointed out.


I have both samples at home, the 0.8 gain and the 1.34 gain (supposedly 0.9 gain blacks) I'll just have to try and see which one I prefer.

I just have this in mind, the 0.8 gain would give me 22FL according to Mike Garrett, that's only 75 nits, not even 100 nits as required per SDR, or am I not thinking this through?

By going with the 1.34 gain, I would probably exceed 100 nits for HDR, and closing the iris or turning the lamp to low mode for SDR.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
I would look at the Epson 5050/6050, it's a better match for your setup.
I am pretty much in love with the JVC, greater blacks, could also replace a Lumagen to some extent as for the Frame Adapt HDR, and it's true 4K.

Epson 6050 is quite expensive for the inferior performance, sure it's brighter, but I'm not too sure that brightness out of the projector is the most important thing.

I would much rather have the projector completely mastering/controlling the picture and just adjusting the brightness by selecting the correct screen material for my environment.

I'm a complete rookie when it comes to projection, but I think I'm on the right track here.

Also, the JVC can Zoom 3840 content to 4096 when watching scope (I will only be watching scope) this yields an extra 12-13% in brightness over a pixel-shifting device with the same lumen output.


The pixel-shifter is also overlapping the pixels yielding even less brightness, so maybe the JVC yields even a bigger percentage in that comparison.

Do you have a great brightness calculator that is accurate?
Vitus4K is offline  
post #22460 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
jake51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 757
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Thanks for the link, Craig Peer
It seems the projector needs to be four meters/13 feet from the screen (I'm in Europe)
Time to get out the tape measure
Craig Peer likes this.
jake51 is offline  
post #22461 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DLCPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1767 Post(s)
Liked: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Yes, this is an interesting topic, I think my long throw can increase the perceived black level somewhat, due to the fact that the light has a long way to travel, correct or not?
Correct: short throw gets you more light, less contrast. Long throw gets you more contrast, less light.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
I just have this in mind, the 0.8 gain would give me 22FL according to Mike Garrett, that's only 75 nits, not even 100 nits as required per SDR, or am I not thinking this through?

By going with the 1.34 gain, I would probably exceed 100 nits for HDR, and closing the iris or turning the lamp to low mode for SDR.
The 100 nit rule of thumb is for HDR, not SDR. Personally, unless it creates major problems with angle of view, I'd lean toward the somewhat higher gain screen to get good HDR performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
I am pretty much in love with the JVC, greater blacks, could also replace a Lumagen to some extent as for the Frame Adapt HDR, and it's true 4K.

Epson 6050 is quite expensive for the inferior performance, sure it's brighter, but I'm not too sure that brightness out of the projector is the most important thing.

I would much rather have the projector completely mastering/controlling the picture and just adjusting the brightness by selecting the correct screen material for my environment.

I'm a complete rookie when it comes to projection, but I think I'm on the right track here.

Also, the JVC can Zoom 3840 content to 4096 when watching scope (I will only be watching scope) this yields an extra 12-13% in brightness over a pixel-shifting device with the same lumen output.

The pixel-shifter is also overlapping the pixels yielding even less brightness, so maybe the JVC yields even a bigger percentage in that comparison.
I think you're definitely on the right track in your thinking. For black levels and HDR performance, I don't think anything competes with the JVC's (unless you throw in a Lumagen or MadVR to deal with HDR tone-mapping). And down the road you could always add a DCR lens for an extra bump in brightness.
coderguy likes this.

JVC NX7, DCR Lens, Marantz SR7010, Screen Innovations 160" 2.35:1 Screen
Front L/R: Duntech Sovereigns, powered by 2 bridged Adcom GFA-555
Center: Revel C208 powered by Cambridge Audio Azur 851W
Dolby Bed (4): Sony Core SS-CS5, Atmos (4): Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE
Subwoofer: DIY 8' sub with 4 18" SI Drivers, powered by iNuke 6000
DLCPhoto is online now  
post #22462 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Do you have a great brightness calculator that is accurate?
Never heard of such a thing...

But --- there are a few calculators, ProjectorCentral, Jack Liu's, the JVC calculator, and the one in my signature. There are some others if you Google. Per the one in my sig, never added the newest JVC's, the older JVC's will show a little TOO bright due to a different native aspect ratio compared to the newer JVC's. You could use one of the others, if using mine select an RS-640, but you'd have to subtract about 10% or so, and the throw and lens shift calculation will not match the newer JVC's. Not sure if or when I'm updating it.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #22463 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:15 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 108 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake51 View Post
The N5 is big, heavy and expensive
I would hate to have it drop down from the wall mount (it is ten pounds heavier than my RS400, I'm already worried that's gonna drop on my head as I'm directly underneath it)
So I've been thinking to place the N5 on a tall table in front of the chairs
My screen is 110 inches wide
What is the minimum distance to fill the screen?
ProjectorCentral.com has a Throw Calculator: https://www.projectorcentral.com/JVC...ulator-pro.htm
surroundsound99 is offline  
post #22464 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:20 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLCPhoto View Post
The 100 nit rule of thumb is for HDR, not SDR.

Thank you!


Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
But --- there are a few calculators, ProjectorCentral, Jack Liu's, the JVC calculator, and the one in my signature.

Thank you!
Vitus4K is offline  
post #22465 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:31 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,986
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2963 Post(s)
Liked: 1561
You could create your own build thread or screen thread in the screen area of the forums, there is a dedicated area to discuss screens.

All I can say is, I would not be spending that kind of money on a screen, unless your budget is unlimited, but then I'd be researching other screens in the forums instead of just picking one of those. You might want to look at the Stewart 1.3 gain screen or something else (I don't know). Point is, for that kind of money, you can probably do better on the screen choice.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #22466 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:38 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,435
Mentioned: 276 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13160 Post(s)
Liked: 10793
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Yes, this is an interesting topic, I think my long throw can increase the perceived black level somewhat, due to the fact that the light has a long way to travel, correct or not?

In that very regard, going with a screen that yields more pop, could be beneficial, otherwise an already dim screen would make the final image too dim, as many of you pointed out.


I have both samples at home, the 0.8 gain and the 1.34 gain (supposedly 0.9 gain blacks) I'll just have to try and see which one I prefer.

I just have this in mind, the 0.8 gain would give me 22FL according to Mike Garrett, that's only 75 nits, not even 100 nits as required per SDR, or am I not thinking this through?

By going with the 1.34 gain, I would probably exceed 100 nits for HDR, and closing the iris or turning the lamp to low mode for SDR.




I am pretty much in love with the JVC, greater blacks, could also replace a Lumagen to some extent as for the Frame Adapt HDR, and it's true 4K.

Epson 6050 is quite expensive for the inferior performance, sure it's brighter, but I'm not too sure that brightness out of the projector is the most important thing.

I would much rather have the projector completely mastering/controlling the picture and just adjusting the brightness by selecting the correct screen material for my environment.

I'm a complete rookie when it comes to projection, but I think I'm on the right track here.

Also, the JVC can Zoom 3840 content to 4096 when watching scope (I will only be watching scope) this yields an extra 12-13% in brightness over a pixel-shifting device with the same lumen output.


The pixel-shifter is also overlapping the pixels yielding even less brightness, so maybe the JVC yields even a bigger percentage in that comparison.

Do you have a great brightness calculator that is accurate?
Using full panel width gains you 6.67%. Being able to reduce the throw distance, using full panel width does add a little more brightness, but I did not agree with the 12% to 13% increase that some people were coming up with.
GlenC likes this.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #22467 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 7,790
Mentioned: 162 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5537 Post(s)
Liked: 2232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Also, the JVC can Zoom 3840 content to 4096 when watching scope (I will only be watching scope) this yields an extra 12-13% in brightness over a pixel-shifting device with the same lumen output.
I’m pretty sure the rated lumens already “credits” the full panel width; i.e., compared with pixel-shifting devices with the same lumen output you’d be losing brightness when not using the zoom aspect ratio.
Dominic Chan is online now  
post #22468 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:41 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Using full panel width gains you 6.67%. Being able to reduce the throw distance, using full panel width does add a little more brightness, but I did not agree with the 12% to 13% increase that some people were coming up with.
You might be correct, but the theoretical increase in brightness need to account for the vertical increase in pixels too, not only the horizontal increase.

It's another 6.66 or 6.67 for the vertical increase, I think you need to add these together to get the true increase, which then again people calculate to 12-13%.

Please ellaborate further if I'm completely out of my mind here.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #22469 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:43 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
I’m pretty sure the rated lumens already “credits” the full panel width; i.e., compared with pixel-shifting devices with the same lumen output you’d be losing brightness when not using the zoom aspect ratio.

This is the most true I think, very good point, JVC most likely rates the specified lumens using the full 1.89:1 panel, all of the 0.69" chips.


The increase is then accounted for by using the zoom, instead of not using the zoom on the JVC, and JVC only.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #22470 of 23719 Old 01-22-2020, 09:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 7,790
Mentioned: 162 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5537 Post(s)
Liked: 2232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
You might be correct, but the theoretical increase in brightness need to account for the vertical increase in pixels too, not only the horizontal increase.

It's another 6.66 or 6.67 for the vertical increase, I think you need to add these together to get the true increase, which then again people calculate to 12-13%.

Please ellaborate further if I'm completely out of my mind here.
The pixel count increase is only in the horizontal direction.
Dominic Chan is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Jvc , nx5 , nx7 , nx9 , rs1000 , rs2000 , rs3000

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