AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Since I use the prismasonic lens with pass-thru for 16:9 I use the full panel for both 16:9 and 2.35:1; it's only oddball or 4:3 ratios that would require masking for light spill. Given the infrequency of that I don't bother with side masking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
That is a very nice looking screen setup.


I'm in the process of setting up a 2.35 setup myself but I don't think I'm going to bother with any masking. I'll make a final decision on it after I get everything setup. If I find that it bothers me, then I'll probably wind up using curtains also. I know that you can get a little motor to automatically draw curtains open and close so I'd probably use that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGuyOR /forum/post/0


I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means. How can you not need some kind of masking for a 1.85:1 movie on a 2.35:1 screen? Rookie here.

You just stretch the 16:9 content 1.3x horizontally just like stretching 4:3 content for a 16:9 TV. No pillar boxes. I don't bother to mask and don't miss it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,308 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rombullterrier /forum/post/0


You just stretch the 16:9 content 1.3x horizontally just like stretching 4:3 content for a 16:9 TV. No pillar boxes. I don't bother to mask and don't miss it.

Not sure that method'll get much play in this sub-forum, in which a primary goal is presenting movies in their OAR.


Anyway, I use black "velvet" curtains to side-mask 16:9 or narrower (similar to the photos above with the valances across the top). Since I zoom down for 16:9, I'm using the full panel and not throwing any direct light there, but they're still somewhat noticeable w/o masking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,544 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Gilvey /forum/post/0


Not sure that method'll get much play in this sub-forum, in which a primary goal is presenting movies in their OAR.


That's for sure.


The last thing I'd want to do is go distorting half the movies I watch.


For me, one of the primary benefits I see in CIH is not merely to have scope movies wider than 16:9 content, but also finally having widescreen scope images perfectly fit the screen - no black bars, the image surrounded by black. Although some people feel today's projectors do black well enough to ignore the dark letterbox bars (or side bars when watching 16:9 with CIH set up), I don't find this to be the case. I'm always aware of the black bars, even with projectors like the JVC RS1 or the Sony SXRD projectors.


I have no doubt that many people certainly can ignore the black bars, but in my experience when people see a fully masked image - the image completely bordered by a black background - vs an image that is not masked they immediately see the difference and prefer the fully masked image.


CIH will make it much easier for me to have all my content fully masked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts
I rarely watch anything but scope content on movies anyway, so for me, movies are not much of an issue. Nearly all of the new Blu Ray discs I buy are in scope format. But I don't think twice about watching sports or casual programming stretched to fit my screen; it looks great on my setup. To me it's better than OAR with masking. I don't think many viewers would even realize that the picture was stretched. Of course, YMMV, and if you are particular in this regard, I recommend reading past threads for posts by Vern Dias and others on the topic before proceeding. Personally, I would suggest buying a projector and lens first, then testing out some temporary screens (made of paper or cardboard) and masking to determine screen size and whether masking is important to you. If you're not sure about a lens, you can simply zoom the projector on 2.35:1 material to get an idea of how it will look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,673 Posts
That geometry change looks terrible, anyone would notice it instantly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGuyOR /forum/post/0


I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means. How can you not need some kind of masking for a 1.85:1 movie on a 2.35:1 screen? Rookie here.

The majority of what I watch is 1.85/1.78 or scope and I account for these with my variable stretch anamorphic lens (by prismasonic) so that all the light from projector is illuminating only the picture and not creating black/grey pillarbox bars on my 2.35:1 screen. In my opine there is no need for masking as a result with no black/grey pillarbox bars to light the unused screen and create a distraction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
I have lived with my 2.35 setup for several months now. I currently do not have any masking but I am now leaning towards getting some. I really do not have room on the sides of my screen to stack curtains. My current plan is to make some plywood shutters that mount to the wall on either side of the screen. I would just swing them back and forth depending on the ratio of the movie.


Other people have found that, depending on your screen configuration, it is just as cheap to buy a regular 1.78 screen as it is to install drapes. That way you would have two screens, on for 2.35 and one for 1.78/1.85.


Laters,

Jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine /forum/post/0


That geometry change looks terrible, anyone would notice it instantly.

I think the OP is probably qualified to make his own determination on that issue, which is why I suggested a temporary screen. I prefer the geometry change using the full width of my screen for sports, and no, I am not blind or stupid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,673 Posts
Just dialled in a 1.33 horizontal stretch to see, and i can say it is totally unwatchable, I showed 3 people sports and all siad it looked so bad as to be laughable. I cant undertand how anyone who claims to use an ISCO III would possibly toelerate such colossal distortion. Id have thought an ISCO user would mask or use a 2nd screen. Oh well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
612 Posts
I recently finished covering the light surfaces in my room with velvet and going "total batcave". One of the many benefits is that the side bars on 16:9 material are significantly darker, especially with bright scenes. So far they're so dark that I can't imagine needing masking. I find that the side bars, being more in the peripheral, are much less distracting in general than the black bars on scope content. They are also capable of getting blacker (room dependent) since they are just blank screen instead of projected "digital black".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,362 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by eq_shadimar /forum/post/0


I have lived with my 2.35 setup for several months now. I currently do not have any masking but I am now leaning towards getting some. I really do not have room on the sides of my screen to stack curtains. My current plan is to make some plywood shutters that mount to the wall on either side of the screen. I would just swing them back and forth depending on the ratio of the movie.

That's exactly what I've done, works well and the price is right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,544 Posts
Not to knock the curtains route - we all have our preferences - but I personally find the types of big, thick curtains used by many people in their theaters to be distracting. Especially when used to border the image (e.g. masking). As much as possible I like the image to be surrounded by flat black, with no visual distraction at all.


To that end I suppose some sort of sliding black boards would do it, as some have done.


Another possibility seems to me is to still use curtains, but very thin black ones, on a track close to the screen's surface. And use just enough material so when the curtain is pulled to mask for 16:9 material, it would be at that point flat, free of folds, and therefore act as a flat mask with little distraction.


At least, that's how it works in my head :) I've yet to even get my projector.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,308 Posts

Quote:
Not to knock the curtains route - we all have our preferences - but I personally find the types of big, thick curtains used by many people in their theaters to be distracting. Especially when used to border the image (e.g. masking). As much as possible I like the image to be surrounded by flat black, with no visual distraction at all.

I only see my thin black curtains when the lights are on. I'd agree that any masking that's distracting is not a good masking.
 
1 - 20 of 37 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