AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Community News & Polls (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/92-community-news-polls/)
-   -   Poll: HDR TV vs. Front Projection for UHD/4K HDR Home Cinema (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/92-community-news-polls/2927534-poll-hdr-tv-vs-front-projection-uhd-4k-hdr-home-cinema.html)

thezaks 10-20-2017 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Al Leong (Post 54989288)
I voted TV. I've recently discovered the Technicolor picture setting for the 65W7 and in my opinion, a projector is not capable of providing the deep color and black low level detail performance of 4K HDR as OLED.

I like projector for the large body image formatting and the immersive experience matched with a big sound that I feel translate using SDR content.

HDR presentations are best viewed with a display that can accurately translate the nuances of dark-to-light dynamic range from 0% black up to 100% white.

Since you are a viewer of content (others might be as well), I value your opinion. I guess another way to do it would be a TV with a motorized screen and projector. More expensive, but the best of both worlds.

Dave

Cam Man 10-20-2017 03:12 PM

With all due respect to the author of the poll, it's a grossly inadequate question for the poll.

Movies are to be projected. Movies on a TV screen (graded for the TV or not) render a TV experience...unless you are a one seat theater sitting very close to the screen.

Direct display UHD/HDR is fine for the medium for which it is graded: TV. Until there are projection grades of movies made available to us (which will never happen), HDR for projection will forever be a different animal than it is for direct view displays for which it is graded (aka TV), hence not comparable.

UHD/HDR content graded for TVs will be have the potential to look as the grade was intended, but that does not a superior movie experience make it. Size matters. I'll take top of the line projected, calibrated 1080p (maybe upscaled), rec. 709, and 8-bit (although I'd love to have 709/10-bit) any time over projected UHD/HDR graded for a small display. Makes zero sense to do otherwise. It's lunacy in the industry. :D :o Priorities gone haywire!

javanpohl 10-20-2017 03:29 PM

Well... this is a rigged poll. Why not ask "what's the best way to watch 4K HDR at 1,000 nits at home?" or "What's the best way to watch a movie on a 140" screen at home?"

JohnAV 10-20-2017 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cam Man (Post 54989572)
Movies are to be projected

Why? Do you consider the latest huge solid state displays that can replace the older projection based system in cinemas to be inferior? I thought your comment about solid-state display being a TV experience was a hoot. When they video master physical media do you think they are looking at a series of projectors and screens? Times have changed. ;)

Yes here's a TV
https://img.global.news.samsung.com/...een_main_1.jpg

Plutotype 10-20-2017 03:43 PM

SONY ZD9 85" anyone under 10k? OLED 77" under 10k anyone? :)

audiofan1 10-20-2017 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by javanpohl (Post 54989658)
Well... this is a rigged poll. Why not ask "what's the best way to watch 4K HDR at 1,000 nits at home?" or "What's the best way to watch a movie on a 140" screen at home?"

Agreed! but as it stands I'll take the nits / wcg and a 10 bit panel all day long (larger size at reasonable price won't hurt:p) as they represent the missing elements from video capturing whats close to what's in real life "Light":)

Cam Man 10-20-2017 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnAV (Post 54989697)
Why? Do you consider the latest huge solid state displays that can replace the older projection based system in cinemas to be inferior? I thought your comment about solid-state display being a TV experience was a hoot. When they video master physical media do you think they are looking at a series of projectors and screens? Times have changed. ;)

Yes here's a TV
https://img.global.news.samsung.com/...een_main_1.jpg

Maybe we need to define "movies." I'm using the definition of feature films...which are created for large front projection in commercial cinemas. There are certainly TV movies/movies for TV...and episodic TV that is of feature film production quality...just not created to be nominal in all venues/environments. My career as a camera operator spans all three of those. We shoot them differently. They are graded differently, and presented differently. The experience for the viewer can be very different once we move them from one category of presentation to another.

In some respects, solid state projection in commercial cinemas is inferior. It is difficult to compare apples to apples because each format has it peculiar variables that affect quality. Even most top of the line commercial cinema projectors are DLP, and are greatly inferior with regards to contrast (certainly sequential contrast) compared to film (in a nominally calibrated and maintained cinema) or Lcos technologies. Film can be a mess if the projector(s) are in disrepair. Gate weave and other artifacts of film front projection are huge killers of PQ. I had forgotten how glorious state of the art front projection can be until I saw a 70mm 8-perf print of Dunkirk this summer. It blew away all the commercial cinema 4K I have been seeing for a year or two now whether Barco or Christie.

Much of what I'm referring to is the viewer experience. The feature film (regardless of how captured, posted, and presented) is designed and executed for a primary release (large venue projection) and a secondary release (video/BD/streaming). The priorities for viewer experience for the feature film will be highest for the large venue. We can emulate that now at home thanks to several generations of very good projectors with more and more powerful light engines that enable that large screen experience. They do so with superior sequential contrast, but not quite the color space or depth as DCI. How to weigh priorities can become somewhat subjective.

HDR is a mess, but it is evolving and will improve for its primary venue: direct view. It is not created for front projection at home, therefore will look best on a direct view display (which points to the poll question). In a way, the content is being adapted to the new environment (home TV) so as to make it a different experience than it was in the cinema. In that respect, the two become apples and oranges. Although they have the same narrative content (originally a feature film), two experiences are created, each superior in the specific environment for which it is created. That is why at home I still prefer front projection of feature films using 1080p BD as the source, and the superb contrast and overall PQ available from our modern projectors. A good 1080p transfer is faithful to the feature film grade. As a person who possibly has a vested interest in that feature film, how faithfully it is rendered for the home is important to me. At least currently, a UHD/HDR transfer is likely not faithful to the feature film grade...intentionally. I'm okay with that...but I have a huge and always growing 1080p BD library. ;)

How's that for a thoughtful diplomatic answer? :D

rayons 10-20-2017 04:47 PM

Hi.

I have a Sony x940c and honestly it is the best movie display experience I have had to date.
Prior to this I had an LG OLED 65" curved something which was junk apart from displaying static images.
I have had some cheap projectors, but these were pixelated junk.

Recently I have considered a projector, but A) Cost is crazy for HDR, B) They all seem to have make a noise.

Now if there's one thing I do right is hear, and even a slight buzz, whirl, hum, electric coil whine across the road, the damn HDD in my NAS will bug me.
Having said that the contrast on the Sony x940c can also hurt my eyes, where there's a scene with a sunny window in a dark room.

I'm planning to move to a house where a dedicated theatre room may be an option.

RaDiKal 10-20-2017 04:55 PM

Go Big AND go home leads to projection

stef2 10-20-2017 05:49 PM

Size matters. When they start selling 35:1 126 inches wide OLED TV, I will get rid of my projector!

Stevio 10-20-2017 05:49 PM

It is about what can be done. The projection industry has really let us down with it's price gouging.

There has been good high contrast screen materials over the decades, the least not being the 3M product in the original LaserVue and product used in the LG Hugo. There is a pocket projector website somewhere with a page that shows the different screen materials available. In matter of fact, many of us, use a virtual projector all day, the LCD. While not a projector in the sense we are talking about here, it shows what sort of performance could be archieve with the right technology. The light is projected through wave guides to shutters and filters at the front instead.

On the otherhand, 100 inch TV's are coming out. Even my old old 42inch TV, I assembled it on the kitchen table initially. It was glorious from 3-4 feet away, far exceeding the local cinema (even today maybe, as we have no Dolby cinema here). People are going to get a far better affect on today's OLED technology, and much better again on the Quantum Dot RGB color filtered near rec2020 blue OLED units, with better HDR and actual increased color volume in HDR compared to the existing rgbw filter. It requires a special structured projection setup to get up to this level. But a modular seemless microled panel screen might get even more and easily go to 200 inches+ and 8k. It might even last a long time.

So it depends on how you look at it, but I would still like to see a good projection setup, using good technologies, at a realistic price, rather than being charged luxury pricing for it all. Unfortunately the industry shot itself this way in the past. The sub $100 projectors on eBay are a good indication of how far the industry has priced the top technologies.

timstephens24 10-20-2017 06:16 PM

When projectors have infinite contrast then I'll do a projector, but since I don't like everything being grey and washed out I'll go with TV (specifically OLED).

blastermaster 10-20-2017 10:12 PM

I'm a huge proponent of projection for a home theater, but if I'm being honest in my answer to that question, my vote for best 4K HDR experience in the home has to be TV. Even the best JVC out there is doubtful to best a TV in terms of brightness (although it may come close in black levels IDK).

That being said, I don't really care about the best 4K/HDR experience ATM. My 138" curved cinemascope screen with a 1080P projector is the bees knees and I'll wait until projection comes "close enough" to a TV in terms of price and performance before I jump in. Yes, I know I'll be waiting quite a while...

MBullen 10-21-2017 03:08 AM

I had a dilemma about this until very recently.
Having a 70" Sharp Aquos TV for a couple of years (good display I must say) and a Sony HW55ES Projector, with a Prismasonic anamorphic lens at the same distance, I wanted to move on to 4K.
I bought around 100 UHD's over the last 2 years, they come with the blu-ray version anyway in most cases.
A 100" electrical 2.35:1 tensioned Draper screen comes down in front of the 70" Sharp with only an inch of separation which results in an approx. equal viewing distance of 11ft. The screen is exactly 2:35m wide and 1m high. Downside, 16:9 projection is somewhat on the small side.
Most of the time my wife watches TV, series and an occasional movie on the 70" Aquos where I watch TV, series and practically all movies through projection, including 3D. Both give a very good experience although projection rules, especially with 2:35:1 movies but that's no secret :) The setup is in the living room but light can be controlled adequately for projection although certainly not at bat cave level.

So, moving to 4K created a dilemma, which technology would get a 4K upgrade first? The TV or the projector? My requirements where kind of clear since day one, very good contrast, popping colours, future proof as much as possible with respect to the different HDR standards (HDR10, HDR+, DV, HLG), 3D and at least the same display size within a budget of around 6000 EUR (7000 USD). In case of a projector upgrade, lens control and lens memory where mandatory since the idea was to get rid of the Prismasonic and to add a dedicated bigger 16:9 electrical tensioned draper in front of the 2.35:1 screen. In case of a TV I preferably wanted OLED.
The extra screen was not foreseen in the budget for now. All criteria, of course, are the same for both technologies.

These 2 choices I caught sight of: Sony XBR-75X940E (75XE9405 in Europe), OLED prices are a killer at that size range and going smaller can never be forgiven. For the projector I wanted the SonyVPL-VW385ES (VPL-VW360ES in Europe) Which one first?:confused:

After a very long deliberation, endless comparisons, I ended up buying the TV first, no 3D though on 2017 TV's which I really cannot understand. After all I wanted the extremely good contrast and colour pop, the future proof HDR varieties and the TV screen size increase first. I don't even want to mention the 18Gb/s HDMI thingy here. Then the price difference was also kind of heavy, the Sony VW385ES was 1.5K EUR (1.8K USD) more than the TV and that's a lot of UHD movies on disc. Let me also say that I could sell that kind of upgrade to SWMBO better ;)

In short, I still watch 2:35 movies, including 3D through projection but all the rest is through the 940E. With the black bars being really black, watching an occasional movie on the Sony 940E is also a treat. Also threw in an Apple TV 4K and replaced the Apple TV 4th Gen.

Projection is more impressive because of size but the contrast, peak luminosity and colours are just phenomenal on the Sony TV.
Already preparing the budget and the SWMBO sales pitch for the next upgrade in 2018 :D

Mike

afzal_b 10-21-2017 03:36 AM

I voted projector. The day I can get a 130" OLED (or comparable emissive technology) at a price point comparable to projectors, then I'll change.

tezster 10-21-2017 03:47 AM

Projector for immersion. But as far has replicating the HDR experience, it has to be a pretty high quality PJ :)

swtfman 10-21-2017 06:00 AM

When I upgraded from 1080p/SDR to 4K/HDR in my living room theater I went from a JVC RS45 & 137" screen to a Vizio P75-C1. I am much happier with the TV. Not having to buy $400 bulbs every 9 to 12 months is also a big plus since this is my primary display.

When I first got into this hobby all I cared about was screen size but over time my focus has shifted to the audio side. The TV allows me more room for speakers and better speaker placement options while delivering an outstanding picture that is still large enough to deliver an immersive movie watching experience when combined with the outstanding audio.

ChromeAce 10-21-2017 08:11 AM

Not sure why you're calling a flat-panel a "TV" and a projector "not a TV." The teleportation of vision requires a tuner, and while projectors don't have them, flat-panels don't get used for it either (even if they still have them). Our tuners are now in separate boxes.

jdskycaster 10-21-2017 08:48 AM

I didn't vote because I have yet to really have a horse in this race and this is why:

For me it always boils down to content first, then price/performance/technology benefits second. I personally stuck with a 720p native FP in my dedicated HT for many years while 1080p projectors were being ever improved upon and with ever decreasing prices.

I finally pulled the trigger on my first 1080p FP only after my library of available content made it logical to my specific cost/benefit scenario. The second 1080p FP was a few years after that and while not directly content related represented another significant leap in performance and therefore made the investment worth it to me.

I am not even on the 4k HDR bandwagon yet as I see this as the same trend playing over and over yet again. Available content improves while the technology improves. Prices continue to plummet and eventually it makes sense to replace something in my HT.

My current 1080p FP to me, blows away the only 4K UHD HDR capable TV I currently have in my home which is in my great room and something I watch while making coffee and toast in the morning. I have to say the nightly news does look fairly spectacular on it. The problem is the nightly news is not worth watching so I normally retire to the HT and throw something up on the big screen that I actually enjoy watching and while the picture is inferior in some ways the overall experience is much better.

Some watch pixels and I have been there done that. I am now far more interested in what all of those pixels represent. In the end its the beauty of HT. Everyone makes their own choice of what means the most.

Uppsalaing 10-21-2017 09:02 AM

formatting
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cam Man (Post 54989982)
Maybe we need to define "movies." I'm using the definition of feature films...which are created for large front projection in commercial cinemas. There are certainly TV movies/movies for TV...and episodic TV that is of feature film production quality...just not created to be nominal in all venues/environments. My career as a camera operator spans all three of those. We shoot them differently. They are graded differently, and presented differently. The experience for the viewer can be very different once we move them from one category of presentation to another.

In some respects, solid state projection in commercial cinemas is inferior. It is difficult to compare apples to apples because each format has it peculiar variables that affect quality. Even most top of the line commercial cinema projectors are DLP, and are greatly inferior with regards to contrast (certainly sequential contrast) compared to film (in a nominally calibrated and maintained cinema) or Lcos technologies. Film can be a mess if the projector(s) are in disrepair. Gate weave and other artifacts of film front projection are huge killers of PQ. I had forgotten how glorious state of the art front projection can be until I saw a 70mm 8-perf print of Dunkirk this summer. It blew away all the commercial cinema 4K I have been seeing for a year or two now whether Barco or Christie.

Much of what I'm referring to is the viewer experience. The feature film (regardless of how captured, posted, and presented) is designed and executed for a primary release (large venue projection) and a secondary release (video/BD/streaming). The priorities for viewer experience for the feature film will be highest for the large venue. We can emulate that now at home thanks to several generations of very good projectors with more and more powerful light engines that enable that large screen experience. They do so with superior sequential contrast, but not quite the color space or depth as DCI. How to weigh priorities can become somewhat subjective.

HDR is a mess, but it is evolving and will improve for its primary venue: direct view. It is not created for front projection at home, therefore will look best on a direct view display (which points to the poll question). In a way, the content is being adapted to the new environment (home TV) so as to make it a different experience than it was in the cinema. In that respect, the two become apples and oranges. Although they have the same narrative content (originally a feature film), two experiences are created, each superior in the specific environment for which it is created. That is why at home I still prefer front projection of feature films using 1080p BD as the source, and the superb contrast and overall PQ available from our modern projectors. A good 1080p transfer is faithful to the feature film grade. As a person who possibly has a vested interest in that feature film, how faithfully it is rendered for the home is important to me. At least currently, a UHD/HDR transfer is likely not faithful to the feature film grade...intentionally. I'm okay with that...but I have a huge and always growing 1080p BD library. ;)

How's that for a thoughtful diplomatic answer? :D

^ This... Fidelity matters... Cinema = movies :cool:

1080p projection at home on a respectable sized screen (100"+) with proper masking is much closer to the cinematic experience than any HDR/4K TV... The size is more immersive and emotional and the projector aesthetic matches the cinema more closely than TV does. :rolleyes:

The arguments for HDR TV, nits, etc... are mostly based on a departure from the artists original creation, a depature from what is cinematic... It reminds me of the internet forum arguements for removing film grain from discs (blu ray or UHD) of 35mm movies :eek:... It takes us away from what the filmmakers wanted... Sports, TV shows, Youtube, video games and such don't factor into the arguement for me. They aren't movies and the livingroom TV / ipad is available for that "content"... ;)

The latest Blade Runner movie (2049) was shot for the cinema, to be projected in 2D on a scope screen in a darkened room. All the other extras, like 3D, HDR/DolbyVision, IMAX, etc... even though shown in some cinemas are "additional" formats... Deakins shot it for 2D projection on a scope screen. In my mind, if I want the cinematic experience at home, that is what I should aim for... For the vast majority of movies, projection = fidelity. :cool:

I've just installed a projector in a dedicated room (103" 2.35 screen, which I'll probably increase when we're done with renovations), but I'll probably buy an OLED for the living room, 55" max (I'd prefer smaller) as it has to not domiate the room. :D

@Cam Man

Thanks for the clear and well thought out post

guachi 10-21-2017 09:48 AM

I chose TV. I recently purchased an LG OLED C7. It's a fantastic TV. My house is also only 1100 square feet. Where would I put a projector? During the day, the room is never dim enough to make a projector worthwhile.

Too much expense for too little benefit. So 4K TV all the way.

p5browne 10-21-2017 10:55 AM

Must be me?

I have a choice of watching the 75", or 65" TVs. Much prefer the 65" for myself.
Yes I can see with some movies, bigger would be better, but for most viewing I prefer the 65". Wife watches the 75", and the 40", and the 2 X 55ers". Rarely my 65". 3rd 55" is in the guest bedroom, and I only watch when there's an issue that needs fixing.

Have no urge for a projector system.

Bill 10-21-2017 11:15 AM

I don't even go to the theater anymore and no one has that big of screens at home. My TV has spoiled me. Projectors can't come close. Plus I can watch at any room lighting, no need for a "cave". My wife and I enjoy being able to watch great PQ with sunlight streaming into the room. I have a room I could make into a "cave" but have no desire to do so and my wife really doesn't.

fierce_gt 10-21-2017 11:18 AM

this is a tricky concept...

imo, i believe that projection is the best way to get the movie theater at home experience. there is something about projection that can't be matched with direct view displays, so you can always tell the difference. so if you're going for the movie theater experience, it has to be projection.

i do not believe that our goal should be the theater experience however... i believe our goal should be the 'window into the movie' experience. and for that, i do believe that plasma or oled delivers a better 'window', albeit a much smaller one.


i still feel the best way to watch movies at home is with a good projector on a good screen in a light controlled room. it could be that years of commercial cinemas being forced to show movies in that matter has conditioned me, but that is the way i feel movies are the most natural. if you can't do a dedicated room, with a good projector and screen though, i feel the quality of front projection becomes unacceptable for movie watching. if those cases, i'd much rather have a higher quality but smaller image from a good tv.

also note, my response is more a comparison of UHD on a tv vs 1080p on a projector as i've never viewed UHD on a projector

tenthplanet 10-21-2017 01:16 PM

Tv's are not film like, screen projection gives you that. So projection.

canillo 10-21-2017 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thezaks (Post 54989468)
Since you are a viewer of content (others might be as well), I value your opinion. I guess another way to do it would be a TV with a motorized screen and projector. More expensive, but the best of both worlds.

Dave

thats exactly the set up I have.

audiofan1 10-21-2017 01:44 PM

Last I checked no one at home was running actual film (save the few who can get there hands on it) home displays (tv's if we must call them that) are more than capable of a cinematic image and it's only getting better. As long as my display is wide enough to pan and scan with my eyes ,its large enough! I've had my best overall cinematic experiences to date while viewing at home from the various display's over the years with my best at theaters occurring far and in between (first being Starwars , Star Trek Generations and most currently Logan and Blade runner 2049 with the later two from Dolby Cinema) As far as hdr/wcg goes projectors fall short and don't meet the all over the place standard for now and may not ever achieve it,there good at what they do but the game has changed indeed and home display's are hard to touch for what this poll is about.

canillo 10-21-2017 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canillo (Post 54993716)
thats exactly the set up I have.

I think we are looking at this the wrong way. there is no point in having a projector in a non light controlled room, the picture will suck, also the amount of light output a 75" OLED or QDOT tv will put out in a controlled room will hurt your eyes.... sometimes causing you to bring the TV's brightness down,and that will just affect the HDR experience. In my room I have both, and even with the "small" 65inch tv , I need some ambient light on to avoid being blinded by the brightness the TV puts out, but when using the projector I need the room to be 100% dark, otherwise the projectors blacks become gray and the picture sucks. Now that being said, If someone gives me the most incredible OLED or QDOT tv to replace my projector, I will say" HEEEELLLLLLLL NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" Ive had the privilege to own any TV I wanted, and I was happy with all my upgrades, but nothing will ever compare to the feeling I had when I installed my projector, made me not wanna watch a movie ona TV ever again.

dnoonie 10-21-2017 02:19 PM

I haven't voted yet since I'm on the fence with this poll since it doesn't consider what I can afford or what I can fit in my HT room.

Honestly I'd have to see a projection setup in person to be able to vote in this poll.

My gut reaction was to vote projection. I think I could be happy with one of those woven AT screens and a top of the line Sony UHD HDR PJ. Can I afford such a setup? No. Do I have the space for it? No. My seating distance would have to remain at 7 foot to accommodate a second row of seats, which would likely limit my screen size. But since cost is no factor in this poll then I might as well put this dream PJ setup on a newly built room.:)

I most certainly prefer quality to quantity. I've chosen a smaller more high quality screen in the past and I will continue to do so because that is what I can afford and that is what's practical for me. That being said the new Dolby theaters being built and the RPX theaters being built will likely drag me out of my HT room more often!

Cheers,

adrummingdude 10-21-2017 02:30 PM

Interesting results.

I voted TV because, well, they just wipe the floor with projectors in EVERY category except size. I get it, size matters, but modern TV's are VERY good and they get bigger, better, and cheaper all the time. I mean just look how many fewer screen uniformity issues there are now vs just a few years ago, even though size and peak brightness continue to climb.

Projection is just old tech, regardless of how many laser lights or cryogenically treated decoupling lenses the newest box has. I get the whole argument of feature films being rendered a certain way as to make HDR TV's not preferable, but technology marches on. How long before either: 1. Feature films will be created and mastered to be consumed at home instead of the theater? or 2. TV tech will be able to emulate any kind of projection rig, possibly even with the necessary command to do so within the films coding to begin with. It's getting harder to ignore that TV's are just better. Once they reach 100" for under $10k, lights out (pun intended) projectors.

EDIT: One thing I will concede for projectors is the ability to place speakers behind the screen. That's nice, and can be a pretty big deal.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.