AVS Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I will be about about 10 feet from a 82 - 86 wide (not diagonal) inch screen (still deciding on the actual screen size). I am having serious decision issues over whether to go AT or non AT screen material.


We don't need to regurgitate the same old arguments for and against AT screens. I know there are both camps, and different levels of quality of execution of setup.


I have a good custom installer who I trust. But ultimately I have to decide AT or not.


Does anyone know at what distance/width ratio the pattern (perf or weave) become invisible? Assume the best weave and perf material fro the sake of argument, as I would pay for the best if need be.


I have excellent vision.


Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I am also on the prowl for AT material for my DIY curved screen. I have compared samples from different manufacturers and the best so far has been the EN4K material from ScreenExcellence. The structure is not visible unless you go right up to the screen and you can clearly see each pixel resolved on the screen (it's the only material I have seen so far that can do this).


Before I got the samples I was hoping the centerstage XD material would do it for me, and while it produces a punchy image that most of the time look perfectly fine, I can still see diagonal lines from the weave when there are bright uniform objects on the screen, like snow, sky or clouds. (I'm currently sitting 3.6 m from the screen.)


My problem now is that SE don't sell the fabric without the frame which makes it really expensive, and I'm also a bit concerned that that it will be sensitive to dirt since it is a textile fabric. If someone would put a dirty finger on it, I'm not sure you would be able to get it clean again. Would be great if I could find a similar fabric at some textile shop...


BR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,540 Posts
so approx. 12' from the screen, but what size screen do you have for the xd material? i am interested in the 4k as well, but from all the reports they say its not as punchy as the xd. have you compared the en1 or en2 with the xd material?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I evaluated at 90'' diagonal 16:9


It's not as punchy as the XD, still it's not that dim either. I think it should work in my situation (BenQ w9000, 270/200 cm wide screen depending on 2.40/1.78:1). The XD was close to Carada BW, maybe a tad less bright, so that should put it at a gain of maybe 1-1.1?


I also tested EN1. I only got a small piece so it was harder to evaluate, but it was about as bright as the EN4K if I remember correctly. I can check again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
Just checked it out:


EN1 and EN4K are close in brightness, maybe EN4K is tad brighter, but it's hard to say. The difference is insignificant anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,540 Posts
wow, only 90"? im looking at 126" with xd material and 12' viewing distance for first row, 16' for second. im a bit disappointed the xd material weave is seen at that close a distance even on that size screen. if its not too much trouble, could you take a picture of the samples all together on a white background like clouds for refernce to all of us here? that would be very helpful. thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
My current screen is 90'' diagonal so I just hanged the samples from it. I'm aiming at getting a new 110'' wide AT scope screen.


Unfortunately I don't have a working camera at the moment only my cell. I can try with that one, but I don't expect the pictures to be that great...


What projector are you pairing with that screen?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
Sorry, it doesn't work. Can't transfer the pics to the computer, it doesn't find the phone when I connect it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
It is a really tough call because I am do not want to invest big bucks in a PJ and get any patterns from the screen material. It is just really hard to say whether using AT (which the main thing for me is all thee fronts being horizontally aligned), will provide a big enough sonic benefit to justify a non AT screen and its superior image characteristics. I know the trade off can be slight if everything is done right....


But I think non AT screens have superior gain, uniformity, off axis viewing, etc. as well.


So it is not just about..."will I see the pattern on an At screen". It is also about what other image quality characteristics will I sacrifice.


If I go non AT, then the center channel will have to be above the screen (but my screen will be pretty low due to room constraints anyway).


I think the simple answer is the one I have come across again and again in my research: There are trade offs whether you use an AT screen or a non AT screen. But for the total experience, the suspension of disbelief, and the best compromise between audio accuracy and image fidelity......AT is the way to go.


Now the next step is to find the absolute best AT screen you an get. Obviously it comes down to Stewart microperf x2 and one of the top weaves. That is a whole other can of worms!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
Well, I don't believe Stewart are the best when it comes to AT, I've heard that from many sources. Microperf is not recommended for acustic reasons and it doesn't look that good either.


ScreenResearch is generally regarded as no. 1, but Screenexcellence is very new. I think their EN4K will be hard to beat and I don't think it has that many disadvantages. Off axis viewing is excellent and the low gain should make for excellent screen uniformity as well. Also, they at least claim that the color and acustic performance is first rate. Except being slightly dimmer I think it looks very much like a normal matte white screen.


You should order screen samples and compare for yourself.


BR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,540 Posts
i would get the 4k screen, but the only thing holding me back would be the gain. the least amount of gain i would want is around 1.2, but the higher the better (for my case, since im going 126" or larger at 21' throw). i wonder if screen research has the exact same gain as the en1/2 screens from screen excellence or if they have a coating on it for higher gain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
There was a screen review in Sound and Vision magazine on six different audio screens apparently the Enlightor 4k is a .76 gain with brighter corners which is weird. Aren't grey screens around the same gain?


"At 0.76, the Enlightor 4K's gain measured lower than its stated gain of 0.98. But its brightness uniformity was superb, with an average gain increase of 4% in the corners. Color response was essentially flat. Acoustically, it measured +2.4/-9.0 dB on-axis, +0.2/-6.9 dB off-axis comparable to the peaks and dips I measured for the Screen Research screen but the Enlightor 4K also diminished the treble by 2 to 3 dB between 1.5 and 8.5 kHz.


The Enlightor 4K's finely woven material appealed to the perfectionist videophile in me. While I can't say its picture looked noticeably better at a distance than those of the other woven screens, it definitely looked better close up. It was the only woven screen that could resolve the JVC projector's pixel pattern. I imagine that with a 4K projector, the difference would be even more dramatic."


Take the space out to go to thereview


soundand visionmag.com/features/3185/private-screening-testing-part-1-page3.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelAbrella /forum/post/16928201


There was a screen review in Sound and Vision magazine on six different audio screens apparently the Enlightor 4k is a .76 gain with brighter corners which is weird. Aren't grey screens around the same gain?

An interesting read.

I think the slightly brighter corners is caused by the holes in the AT screens. If you're looking at the center you can see straight through the wholes, whereas if you look to the sides, the holes are somewhat blocked by the thickness of the fabric. Less visible holes --> slightly higher gain.


Anyway, such tiny variations in uniformity can't be seen by the naked eye. I think you have to get closer to 50% before it's noticable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelAbrella /forum/post/16928201


There was a screen review in Sound and Vision magazine on six different audio screens apparently the Enlightor 4k is a .76 gain with brighter corners which is weird. Aren't grey screens around the same gain?


"At 0.76, the Enlightor 4K's gain measured lower than its stated gain of 0.98. But its brightness uniformity was superb, with an average gain increase of 4% in the corners. Color response was essentially flat. Acoustically, it measured +2.4/-9.0 dB on-axis, +0.2/-6.9 dB off-axis comparable to the peaks and dips I measured for the Screen Research screen but the Enlightor 4K also diminished the treble by 2 to 3 dB between 1.5 and 8.5 kHz.


The Enlightor 4K's finely woven material appealed to the perfectionist videophile in me. While I can't say its picture looked noticeably better at a distance than those of the other woven screens, it definitely looked better close up. It was the only woven screen that could resolve the JVC projector's pixel pattern. I imagine that with a 4K projector, the difference would be even more dramatic."


Take the space out to go to thereview


soundand visionmag.com/features/3185/private-screening-testing-part-1-page3.html

the fact that they had higher gain in the corners tells you that Brent's testing was flawed. That and every screens gain was lower that advertised also tells you that something was wrong with Brent Butterworth's testing. I can tell you that from other independent testing, the gain of the EN4K is indeed .98. That aside, what Brent did get right, was that the EN4K was the smoothest looking material and also the best looking and the only one that could resolve the single 1080 pixel burst test. That alone should tell you alot.

The color of the EN4K has also been independently tested and you can see those result now on the company's web site.


Good viewing and listening!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/16925598


Just checked it out:


EN1 and EN4K are close in brightness, maybe EN4K is tad brighter, but it's hard to say. The difference is insignificant anyway.

You can see more about SE including photos comparing its three formultion and some comparisons to microperf and SMX in this thread
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=987886


Good viewing and listening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbaldguy /forum/post/16928687


We do in fact sell the Screen Excellence material by itself. Its called the Craftsman Series screens. It includes the proper size piece of material, the matching black backing layer and the proper length of GripFix gripping channel and hardware tool. This channel can be adhered to any existing frame, or your own home made frame and provides an easy way to grip the fabric concentrically WITHOUT any puckers in the fabric. The Gripfix nylon channel adds only pennies to the cost of the Craftsman screen. So think of as getting the fabric with free gripping system. Its better than anything you could DIY yourself.

For me it's actually more expensive to import the Craftsman series screen to Europe than to buy the screen with frame from the UK. Otherwise it would be a great idea. Are the gripfix channels detachable from the frame so I can use them the same way as the Craftsman series?


What I'm concerned about is that it's a lot of money if I don't get a good result from my DIY frame (if I for instance have problems with wrinkles) If I could have a good fit with your frame it wouldn't be much to hesitate about.


However, I need a frame that is protruding as little as possible from the screen to avoid shadowing from the masking panels. Also the curvature of your curved screens are too small and only takes care of half my pincushioning even at maximum throw.


I don't get the rationale for choosing such wide radii for your curved screens? Your screens fits throw ratios of about 3 whereas most (at least DLP) projectors max out at about 2? Well, if you slide the lens in and out, maybe it's a good compromise for both, but there is a lot of folks who keep the lens in place at all times (like me). It doens't feel good to splash out lots of money on a screen that only does the job partly.
Maybe a choice between two curvature radii would be an idea for the future? Say, one for a throw ratio of 2 and one for 3?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Screen Excellence EN4K is very interesting and definitely has the finest weave of any material I have ever seen. Looks more like silk than a weave. I am in Sweden, but will be asking him to research it before we do my install. They are based out of London, so I am sure he could get his hands on a screen if he wanted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,540 Posts
drexler what pj are you using for your comparisons?
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top