[cybrsage]

After getting the soffiting done in my dedicated theater room, I realize I have to shrink my screen. The width is just too wide...the image will be under the side soffits and, after drywall, etc., the wide speakers will have no where to sit.


I want a 2.39 screen size so I can do constant image height with the Panasonic AE-4000 projector. With the projector, you setup the 2.39 first and save to memory...then the 1.78 and save to memory. It then changes automatically for you (or manually with one button press). The 1.78 and 2.35 screens both have the same height, just the 1.78 is not as wide. The projector zooms in and out to make the picture fit based on the two saved memories. Very nice.


However, I just determined my screen can only be 95 inches wide.This makes a 40" high 2.39 which is a 40" high 1.78. A 40" high 1.78 is only 71" wide...that is pretty small. On the other hand, the tallest my screen can be is 48" high. I was thinking of doing a hybrid of both. I will setup the screen to be 94" wide and 48" tall. This gives me a 2.39 screen of 94" x 39" = 92" diag with 7" white bars at the top and bottom and a 1.78 screen of 85" x 48" x 98" diag with 4.5" white bars at the sides.


So what do you guys think? I have seen pictures of people who have the white on the bottoms and it does not seem out of place. Anyone have a setup without masking and can chime in?

 

[millerwill]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage /forum/post/20766143


After getting the soffiting done in my dedicated theater room, I realize I have to shrink my screen. The width is just too wide...the image will be under the side soffits and, after drywall, etc., the wide speakers will have no where to sit.


I want a 2.39 screen size so I can do constant image height with the Panasonic AE-4000 projector. With the projector, you setup the 2.39 first and save to memory...then the 1.78 and save to memory. It then changes automatically for you (or manually with one button press). The 1.78 and 2.35 screens both have the same height, just the 1.78 is not as wide. The projector zooms in and out to make the picture fit based on the two saved memories. Very nice.


However, I just determined my screen can only be 95 inches wide.This makes a 40" high 2.39 which is a 40" high 1.78. A 40" high 1.78 is only 71" wide...that is pretty small. On the other hand, the tallest my screen can be is 48" high. I was thinking of doing a hybrid of both. I will setup the screen to be 94" wide and 48" tall. This gives me a 2.39 screen of 94" x 39" = 92" diag with 7" white bars at the top and bottom and a 1.78 screen of 85" x 48" x 98" diag with 4.5" white bars at the sides.


So what do you guys think? I have seen pictures of people who have the white on the bottoms and it does not seem out of place. Anyone have a setup without masking and can chime in?

There's a whole thread on this top, CIA = constant image area (or approximately so). I have such a hybrid screen you are talking about: 144"x72", so have it 72H and 128W for 16x9 pics, and 144W and 61H for 2.35. I have good light control and a high contrast pj (RS20) and find that masking is really not necessary. I wanted the full width my room could take for 2.35, but didn't want to restrict the 16x9 pic that a true 2.35 screen would give. I am very pleased with this hybrid approach.

 

[cybrsage]

AH! See....I did not even know there was a name for it! Thanks, I will read up on it!

 

[Brad Horstkotte]

I went with a 136" x 64" screen (2.125 ratio) - not due to space limitations (I could have gone bigger in both dimensions) - but because when I chose the widest width I wanted for 2.35:1, the 16:9 was too small for my taste; and when I chose the 16:9 height I wanted, the 2.35:1 image was far too wide for my taste. So I chose the width I wanted for 2.35:1, and the height I wanted for 16:9. I may add masking at a later time, but loving it as is.