[jmlonegan]

I’m sure you proud owners of an AE100 have tried different image sizes. I wanted to hear what size you thought gave the best picture (I know it’s subjective). I would think the bigger the picture the less crisp the picture becomes but there must be a point that the picture is very good but also good sized. I’m trying to figure out how far back I’ll need to put the projector (as soon as I talk the wife into it).


Also, in the owner’s manual it gives calculations for Minimum projection and Maximum projection distance. Is it better to project from the Min or Max or does it make any difference. Thanks in advance for any responses.

 

[jcase]

I too would be interested in this information.

 

[kenfab]

OK, I'll put in my 2 centavos:

Assuming you want the image to fill the screen completely, basically you'll want to order the screen first (whichever one "fits" in your viewing area), then calculate the projector distance from there.


As an example, I purchased a 92"x52" screen (105.5" diagonal). Here are the formulas taken from the manual:

SD = Screen Diagonal measurement

Units = meters

Screen Width: SW=SDx0.872

Screen Height: SH=SDx0.490

Minimum Projection Distance: LW=1.42xSW-0.02

Maximum Projection Distance: LT=1.70xSW-0.08

Image Lower Edge from Lens Center: H1=SW/32


Running my numbers through those calculations, I came up the following:

SD (meters) SD (inches) SD (Feet)

2.68 105.50 8.79


Screen Width: 2.34 92.00 7.67

Screen Height: 1.31 51.70 4.31

Minimum Projection Distance: 3.30 129.85 10.82

Maximum Projection Distance: 3.89 153.25 12.77

Image Lower Edge from Lens Center: 0.07 2.87 N/A


So, for my screen, I should optimally place the projector between 10.82' and 12.77'.


I may be wrong, but I believe the closer the projector is to the screen the brighter the image (less light loss), and therefore the minimum distance is "best".


Hope that helps,

Ken

 

[DRS]

I would say between 80 and 92 inches wide. With a darker room you could go up to 92" max and with a "unfinished" room 80" max for best PQ.

 

[hhelmut]

@ DRS


when I was testing the AE100 I got the same results


hb

 

[jmlonegan]

Quote:

Originally posted by DRS I would say between 80 and 92 inches wide. With a darker room you could go up to 92" max and with a "unfinished" room 80" max for best PQ.

This may seem like a stupid question but you do mean "up to 92" max and with a "unfinished" room 80" max for best PQ" measured diagonally? Seems like some people are talking width when they talk about projectors.

 

[DRS]

I never typed measured diagonally. I always speak in terms of width when it comes to screen size...

 

[kenfab]

jmlonegan, I understand your confusion. For the most part, for Direct View and RPTV's, "Screen Size" is almost always expressed as a diagonal measurement... i.e. my Sony XBR Wega 36" and Toshiba 65" HD RPTV are both measured diagonally. However, for some strange reason that I don't understand, when talking about Front Projector Screens, some measure them horizontally (i.e., its width). So, while I'd say my screen is 106", others would say it's 92". In fact, it's 92"Wx52"H = 106" Diagonal.


I, for one, wish that everyone would stick with the Standard, and express all Screen Sizes diagonally to avoid this type of confusion.


By the way, if the post I made to this thread on the 18th is unclear, please let me know and I'll try to explain it differently.


Ken

 

[DRS]

Quote:

Originally posted by kenfab I, for one, wish that everyone would stick with the Standard, and express all Screen Sizes diagonally to avoid this type of confusion.

If you wish this then please go back to direct views & RP. The diagonal measurement is a product of marketing to make the consumer believe they are getting a larger screen.


With varying aspect ratios width is the preferred and most accurate way to discuss screen size.

 

[kenfab]

DRS - "If you wish this then please go back to direct views & RP."


There's no need to be an ass. My point was, there's obviously a great deal of confusion regarding this issue, and, all marketing issues aside, there can be no denying the fact that if all should follow a standard when stating screen size, there would be much less confusion. I agree that with varying aspect ratios it might make more sense to express screen size by its width, as it stands I'd say the general public doesn't yet understand this. So, until such knowledge is widely known, perhaps everyone should clearly state their method of measurement (i.e. My Screen is 92"W).


Sound fair?


Ken

 

[DRS]

Quote:

Originally posted by kenfab I'd say the general public doesn't yet understand this.

That's an interesting perspective, but this isn't the general public is it?


BTW you would do yourself a favor to edit your personal attack.

 

[kenfab]

Interesting... you answered a question with a question.


Regardless, I'll answer yours... I'd say yes, this is absolutely a *Public* Forum where the General Public does indeed reside.

Contrary to some who may believe otherwise, this is not an elitist club whereby all open thought and dialog is discouraged. Do a simple search a 9 times out of 10 you'll read about someone talking about replacing their 36" TV, or 32" TV, or 56" RPTV for a Bigger Picture. Do you *really* think they are referring to their screens' *width*? No, I don't think so.


About the "personal attack". Grow up. I was trying to provide some insight into the subject for another member and you essentially told me to take a hike because I didn't believe in your point of view. *That's* being an ass.


Ken

 

[robertmee]

No, in actuality, this is not a public forum. It is owned and operated by AVS Science and we are all guests. I would also argue that the general public does not reside here. Most people who are here have an intense interest in AV. They/We are a subset of the general public. If it were the general public, we would be discussing more about Samsung, Sound Design, Technics and other mass market consumer products. As it is, even the "higher" end consumer products by Bose and to some extent Sony get a bad rap.


As DRS correctly stated, the diagonal picture measurement has been propogated by marketing to make a screen sound bigger. Same with Computer monitor manufacturers. Not to mention when consumers get duped when they buy a 17" diag monitor, only to find 15" viewable.


With the varying aspect ratios I think we can agree that width is a much better measurement for screen size.


All that being said, I do feel that DRS comment was a wee bit harsh. But so was kenfab's response. So we're all even

 

[DRS]

Yeah, I'm having a bad day. Sorry Ken...

 

[kenfab]

OK, now we're talking semantics here. Yes, I do realize that this Forum is privately held, but for all intents and purposes, since *anyone* can join free of charge, with absolutely *no* check for the person's authenticity, I'd say this is as close to a "Public" Forum as you'll get. And yes, I understand there is (necessary) moderation, and have witnessed some threads being deleted and/or censored.


Now, getting to my point, how can one argue about the fact that so many have "incorrectly" stated their screen size when referring to their TV's? Or better yet, how many people have been lurking and have *never* posted a thing? Regardless of any brand names, there are *many* (no one knows if they're the majority or not) reading these boards that *do* still believe in the "Diagonal Screen Marketing Hype". So, as I asked DRS, I'll ask you the same... until such knowledge is widely known, perhaps everyone should clearly state their method of measurement (i.e. My Screen is 92"W)?


That's all I'm saying.


Once again, to be perfectly clear, I *agree* that everyone should begin expressing *all* Visual Displays in terms of their widths.


OK?


Ken


PS Wow, I sincerely appreciate the apology DRS. It's accepted. And cheer up, it's not that bad, is it?

 

[robertmee]

Ken,


Oh, I certainly agree with the screen size designation part. I've read many many threads and had to read between the lines when someone states that my screen is an "X" inch screen. Of course, if we limit ourselves to the "W" designation for size, then what about all those 4:3 screens vs 16:9 screens? Let's go all out and make everyone state width, height, diagonal and aspect

 

[kenfab]

Agreed, except for perhaps for the Aspect part. If one was to show

 

[TuneyToons]

Hi all,


Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a reason to use screen width. I think the 1.3 - 2.0x number on the projector's zoom lens (for this example, I used 1.3 - 2.0x, could be any numbers), is used as the throw distance calculation. For example (let's use 1.3 - 2.0x), if my screen's width is 92 ", then the throw distance of this particular projector is 119.2" to 184". But I could be wrong. Any advanced members can chime in here?


toon.

 

[kenfab]

TuneyToons, please read my post above. Third from the top.


Ken

 

[TuneyToons]

thanks Ken,


Must've missed it while skimming! I just wanted to point out that there may be a reason why we don't measure diagonals in front projection...


toon.