## What's your prime seating's field of view?

• ### Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV less than 36deg = prime row more than 3.68xH

Votes: 1 1.0%
• ### Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 36-43deg = prime row between 3.68xH and 3.00xH

Votes: 5 5.2%
• ### Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 44-53deg = prime row between 2.99xH and 2.39xH

Votes: 17 17.5%
• ### Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 54-62deg = prime row between 2.38xH and 2.00xH

Votes: 7 7.2%
• ### Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 2.00xH

Votes: 2 2.1%
• ### Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV less than 36deg = prime row more than 1.54xW

Votes: 9 9.3%
• ### Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 36-43deg = prime row between 1.54xW and 1.26xW

Votes: 19 19.6%
• ### Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 44-53deg = prime row between 1.25xW and 1.00xW

Votes: 30 30.9%
• ### Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 54-62deg = prime row between 0.99xW and 0.84xW

Votes: 3 3.1%
• ### Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 0.84xW

Votes: 4 4.1%
1 - 20 of 114 Posts

#### DigitalAV

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · ·
Hey folks,

What's your prime seating's field of view? Here's a good primer:

http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/2013314viewing-angles/

Notes:

IMAX-like experience - native 16:9 screen (commercial = 1.43:1 - 1.9:1): between 60deg - 80deg (IMAX mid-point = 70deg)

SMPTE closest - native scope screen (2.39:1): 62deg

20th Century Fox reference - native scope screen (2.39:1): 45deg

SMPTE & CEDIA reference - native scope screen (2.39:1): 43deg

THX farthest - native scope screen (2.39:1): 36deg

Choices:

Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV less than 36deg = prime row more than 3.68xH

Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 36-43deg = prime row between 3.68xH and 3.00xH

Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 44-53deg = prime row between 2.99xH and 2.39xH

Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV 54-62deg = prime row between 2.38xH and 2.00xH

Native Scope/CIH Screen (2.3x:1) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 2.00xH

Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV less than 36deg = prime row more than 1.54xW

Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 36-43deg = prime row between 1.54xW and 1.26xW

Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 44-53deg = prime row between 1.25xW and 1.00xW

Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV 54-62deg = prime row between 0.99xW and 0.84xW

Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 0.84xW

Constant Image Area Screen (N/A) - Please pick a "most watched" format and FOV above

#### DigitalAV

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · ·
Edit note: IMAX-like experience - native 16:9 screen (commercial = 1.43:1 - 1.9:1): between 60deg - 80deg (IMAX mid-point = 70deg)

#### unretarded

·
##### Premium Member
Joined
·
4,384 Posts
Too complex for me to think about this late at night.....

16:9 121 inch diag, 9 foot seating distance....tell me whatever that is and I will vote.

#### DigitalAV

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · ·
@Craig Peer is on team Big FOV!

Craig's FOV:

Scope: 57deg

HDTV: 47deg

Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreen, StudioTek 130 G3 material - 50.2 x 118 x 128.2 diagonal, 2.35:1 aspect ratio - 108" viewing distance - .915 screen widths.

Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreen, Neve 1.1 material – 59.5 x 106 x 122 diagonal - 1.78:1 aspect ratio - 122" viewing distance - 1.15 screen widths.
Actually, I have a 123" 1.78:1 Cima Neve and a 128"diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130. I do comparisons weekly ( if not daily ).

Two screens might be crazy, but it's a fine madness !

#### DigitalAV

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · ·
Too complex for me to think about this late at night.....

16:9 121 inch diag, 9 foot seating distance....tell me whatever that is and I will vote.

Hi! Your FOV is 51deg. Excellent! #TeamBigFOV

#### markmon1

·
##### Super Moderator
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
10,875 Posts
Hi! Your FOV is 51deg. Excellent! #TeamBigFOV
Im at 7 feet from 10 foot wide, 135" 16x9. That puts me in here: Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 0.84xW?

DigitalAV

#### DigitalAV

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · ·
Im at 7 feet from 10 foot wide, 135" 16x9. That puts me in here: Native HDTV/CIW Screen (16:9) - FOV greater than 62deg = prime row less than 0.84xW?
Nice! The captain of Team Big FOV weighing in at 71deg! Once you go closer, you never go backwards (until you get a bigger screen)!

markmon1

#### JRock3x8

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
4,092 Posts
9.5 feet from 11.5 feet wide 16:9

also @markmon - you are my hero.

#### ack_bk

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
11,541 Posts
9.8' from a 129" 2.35:1 screen.

#### markmon1

·
##### Super Moderator
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
10,875 Posts
9.5 feet from 11.5 feet wide 16:9

also @markmon - you are my hero.
It's been quite a journey and expense for me. I started with 2 rows at 14 feet back from my 135" 16:9. Then, I decided I wanted to get closer because I did a lot of desktop work in the theater and was having a hard time reading text. So I spent a decent amount of money adding another platform in my room, buying furniture for it, and putting my main seating on the floor. This moved me to 10 feet from the 135".

But well 10 feet is the bass null spot in a 21 feet room. And also my back platform had 4 12' IB subs firing into my back. I could hardly hear those at the new spot. So I built 4x15" infinite baffle subs in the front of the room. I changed all the room treatments and addressed my speakers. I had in walls for the rear 4 speakers. Those were all in the wrong position. So I "upgraded" those to 805D3. All seemed ok.

Then maybe 6 months later my dealer brings this \$5000 Sony 285ES over and convinces me I need to go 4K. I buy the 285ES. I realize that 10 feet from my screen isn't giving me noticeable benefit over the old eshift 4k. But I drag my couch out to 8 feet or so and its better. 7 feet is even better, but its enough so that if anyone is in rows behind me my head is in the way. So I go with what was maybe 8.5 feet. So the room has to all get changes made again. And now this new platform I made has a big gaping spot behind it of empty space, which sucks. So I add a snack chest behind the couch and go 8.5 feet.

As I'm prepping for my delivery of my NX9, I reevaluate this 8.5 feet as I really want to be 7 feet away from the screen. And I'm in this room alone 99% of the time anyway. So I get some motion actuators and rig up my couch so that it can be pushed and pulled forward and back electronically with a flip of a switch. So now it is 7 feet from the 135" screen and if more than 2 people come over, I can flip the switch and go back to 8.5 feet position.

So now I'm 7 feet from the screen and thrilled. It looks huge again
Also, moving forward to 7 feet got me to the front 1/3 of the room and out of that dead bass null zone so even that is better.

#### Attachments

• 782.5 KB Views: 1,131
DigitalAV

#### JRock3x8

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
4,092 Posts
It's been quite a journey and expense for me. I started with 2 rows at 14 feet back from my 135" 16:9. Then, I decided I wanted to get closer because I did a lot of desktop work in the theater and was having a hard time reading text. So I spent a decent amount of money adding another platform in my room, buying furniture for it, and putting my main seating on the floor. This moved me to 10 feet from the 135".

But well 10 feet is the bass null spot in a 21 feet room. And also my back platform had 4 12' IB subs firing into my back. I could hardly hear those at the new spot. So I built 4x15" infinite baffle subs in the front of the room. I changed all the room treatments and addressed my speakers. I had in walls for the rear 4 speakers. Those were all in the wrong position. So I "upgraded" those to 805D3. All seemed ok.

Then maybe 6 months later my dealer brings this \$5000 Sony 285ES over and convinces me I need to go 4K. I buy the 285ES. I realize that 10 feet from my screen isn't giving me noticeable benefit over the old eshift 4k. But I drag my couch out to 8 feet or so and its better. 7 feet is even better, but its enough so that if anyone is in rows behind me my head is in the way. So I go with what was maybe 8.5 feet. So the room has to all get changes made again. And now this new platform I made has a big gaping spot behind it of empty space, which sucks. So I add a snack chest behind the couch and go 8.5 feet.

As I'm prepping for my delivery of my NX9, I reevaluate this 8.5 feet as I really want to be 7 feet away from the screen. And I'm in this room alone 99% of the time anyway. So I get some motion actuators and rig up my couch so that it can be pushed and pulled forward and back electronically with a flip of a switch. So now it is 7 feet from the 135" screen and if more than 2 people come over, I can flip the switch and go back to 8.5 feet position.

So now I'm 7 feet from the screen and thrilled. It looks huge again

Also, moving forward to 7 feet got me to the front 1/3 of the room and out of that dead bass null zone so even that is better.

Seems like you would be an ideal candidate for a UST.

One of the things I struggle with is ceiling height and screen size and all of the various trade offs that come with that.

Traditional 1.39 throw projectors flat out won’t work in my theater.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#### bud16415

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
9,163 Posts
SMPTE & THX etc specs IMO are overused in HT design and are also dated in terms of today’s resolutions and desires of viewers. These specs were set up for large venue commercial theaters with the goal of cramming as many people into a theater and allowing the worst seats to still meet a minimum level of acceptability. Free selection takes place in most commercial theaters on a first come first to pick. Theaters are rarely filled to capacity and most people don’t use a formula but have an idea what they like from past experiences. When the wider scope formats were devised they went along with newer lower theaters being built and a wider sound stage had to be built. Where balconies were common in Academy AR theaters of the 20’s and 30’s dedicated scope theaters were lower and flatter. Now we have the worst of the history of motion pictures with these multi Cineplex theaters, cramming them in to show more movies to less people per movie on 16:9 screens letter boxed CIW to scope sometimes. The seating distance are not at all to most liking.

IMAX has always been about limiting the seating distances and providing more optimal seats. They also have always understood immersion and its relationship to resolution.

Here is my problem with relating seating distance to screen width or horizontal angles. Our vision goes out to 180 degrees. Any width screen is ok actually ok. There becomes a point where it is impractical and the detail out there is so far out of our acute vision that it makes sense to stop. The far more important direction that limits our vision is up and down, both in pure FOV and also with eye movement and where we feel strain with eye movement. This is the reason CIH became the standard for years with the exception of IMAX and even IMAX and IMAX 1.89 is composed different to allow for the limits of vertical vision.

The standards should be based around height and everyone I know that has CIH theaters tell me they base the screen size on height and possibly resolution.

In my perfect world and if I was watching 4k material exclusive my personal likes would have the image height for both scope and flat to be half my seating distance, or 2X SH = SD (2 times screen height equals seating distance). For IMAX 1.89 content I would want 1.5X SH = SD as that is roughly how these movies are composed and how when there is also a scope release of the same movie how the scope version is cropped out.

I don’t live in a perfect world. My room and projector limits me still. I still watch 1080p. my throw distance max in the room limits screen size and seating location has moved forward as far as I can. All this goes together right now to give me for scope and flat CIH (2.4X SH = SD) and for IMAX 1.89 (1.77SH = SD)

Because I have a variable image size method of projection I set the max size scope and IMAX 1.89 for my personal preferences given room, projector and best media. I then go less immersive based around media quality and my guests likes. I should print the THX seating chart and have it handy so I can ask my guests where they would like to sit, because I have available all the seats shown in red in my single row theater as virtual rows thru zoom. For instance having been to movies with my older sister my whole life I know her and her husband like to sit near the back of the theater. When they come over I don’t even ask I just set the immersion at 3.2X SH =SD and also tame the subs and lower the overall sound level. I don’t mind that immersion level I still enjoy the movie. Just as I use an immersion level of 3.5X SH = SD for watching most network TV, it is still both a larger image and more immersive than 99% of people watching flat panel TVs would view it at.

I hope more people will adopt the screen height system and stop worrying about the angles in the future.

#### Dave in Green

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
11,085 Posts
Great poll. I'm at 10' from a 100" 16:9 screen, which is consistent with the old general rule of 10" to 12" of diagonal per 1' of viewing distance. My wife prefers our current 40 degree viewing angle, which would put us a few rows from the back of a THX-certified cinema as THX recommends "a 36 degree viewing angle from the farthest seat in the auditorium."

I could live with a little closer. But the closer I get the more image flaws I see so I try to keep it balanced between image size and perceived image quality that best suits me. There seems to be quite a bit of variability on how tolerant different people are to more visible artifacts as we get closer to the screen. One size definitely doesn't fit all, YMMV and all the usual caveats.

#### Craig Peer

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
19,848 Posts
Nice! The captain of Team Big FOV weighing in at 71deg! Once you go closer, you never go backwards (until you get a bigger screen)!
My wife tried to get things to go backwards. We compromised - no closer, no further back. It's a FOV stand off !

#### bud16415

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
9,163 Posts
Can I vote twice ( since I have 2 screens ) or have you taken care of that for me ? Thanks !
Only vote for your max size that’s what I did. Even though when I watch The Hateful Eight I go wider. What's the point of 2.76:1 if you can't go wider.

#### AV_Integrated

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
7,072 Posts
Great poll. I'm at 10' from a 100" 16:9 screen, which is consistent with the old general rule of 10" to 12" of diagonal per 1' of viewing distance. My wife prefers our current 40 degree viewing angle, which would put us a few rows from the back of a THX-certified cinema as THX recommends "a 36 degree viewing angle from the farthest seat in the auditorium."

I could live with a little closer. But the closer I get the more image flaws I see so I try to keep it balanced between image size and perceived image quality that best suits me. There seems to be quite a bit of variability on how tolerant different people are to more visible artifacts as we get closer to the screen. One size definitely doesn't fit all, YMMV and all the usual caveats.
I think this is it. It's so much personal preference, and while I think I may have coined that 10" to 12" statement, it is because all the polling and questions asked of people over the years really just plays out to that being the 'typical'.

Using the older 1.5x image width scenario, which was common in relation to 1080p maximizing resolution yielded a smaller screen size. About 9" of diagonal for each foot of viewing distance (16:9 screen). Few seemed to go that route, and I'm never sure if people that have smaller screens are doing so by choice, or because of room limitations as it often seems to be the case.

I stick with the 10" to 12" rule because it's easy to remember and calculate and because it seems to jive with what people actually are using. But, it definitely seems to lean larger and larger and larger as time goes on.

DigitalAV

#### Dave in Green

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
11,085 Posts
@AV_Integrated, I believe I did pick up that 10" to 12" diagonal per 1' viewing distance with 16:9 screens from you, and when I looked at my setup I was right at 10". I think there has been a general trend upward in home theater screen FOV to the point that 12" (47 degrees) is probably closer to typical today than 10" (40 degrees) whereas a few years ago it may have been the other way around. I find that I can be comfortable at 47 degrees on quality Blu-rays but not with lower quality content where I become distracted by artifacts. Quality 4K resolution will probably push the average FOV up even further in the future.

#### Tom Roper

·
##### Registered
Joined
·
4,753 Posts
In the theater, I like it about 1/3 from the rear, at home I prefer the same FOV, about 36 degrees for 16x9 panel.

1 - 20 of 114 Posts