AVS Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I apologize in advance for the length of this post….just wanna make sure I’m conveying my thinking and goals accurately.

Anyways, I’m setting up a theater room in my basement and in my particular case due to a low ceiling (under 8’) the limiter on my screen size is height. I can’t got over 56” for the overall vertical screen dimension. I’ll be getting a BenQ W1070 and my viewing will be around 60% movies and 40% tv (mostly sports). So at first I was thinking I’d just choose the largest 16:9 screen that would fit my height restriction which ended up being a 106” from the Carada’s Precision line. That screen has an overall frame height of 56.1” which would work.

Then I got to thinking that if it’s the height that’s the restriction I should look into 2.35 screens since I can certainly go wider. So I looked up which 2.35 screens have close to a 56” overall height and I saw that Carada makes a 128” screen that’s got a 54.3” overall height. It has a viewing height of 50.1”. I check their 16:9 screens again and see that their 102” screen has a viewing height of 50.0”. I think to myself…well that’s super close and if I have 1/10” of viewing area that’s not being used when watching 16:9 content then that’s certainly acceptable. I’d also be perfectly fine have pillar boxes when watching 16:9 content if it means I get to enjoy 2.35 movies at their full impact. Maybe even down the road I’d add a masking solution.

I’m feeling good at this point ….seems like I’ll get the best of both worlds. I’d get to have a 102” viewing size for 16:9 content and 128” for 2.35 content. ….and I’d only have to give up 4” of diagonal size compared to what I was originally going to buy (and about a $200 cost bump for the 2.35 screen) to achieve it.

Then I got to thinking though that I should check on a projector calculator to make sure the numbers are all kosher. So I go to projector central’s calculator tool and when set to a 2.35:1 aspect ratio it gives:

Image Diagonal: 128”
Image Height: 50”
Throw Distance: 11’3” @ max zoom of 1.30x

I switch it to 16:9 and scroll through the screen sizes to try and get the same 11’3” throw (I don’t want to move the projector) and when I get it set to an 11’3” throw it’s showing as:

Image Diagonal:103”
Image Height: 51”
Throw Distance: 11’3” @ min zoom of 1.00x

So this kinda sucks since it’d mean that I’d have an inch of vertical content off of the screen. Except that sometimes as I’m moving the numbers around on the calculator it does give me a 50” height and 11’3” throw for a 103” diagonal screen @ 16:9. Which tells me that maybe the 1” of height is really a fraction of an inch and rounding errors in the calculator make it show up or not depending on which variable you’re switching around. A fraction of an inch split at top and bottom wouldn’t’ be so bad maybe.

Anyways….just looking for opinions on if I’m overthinking things and if this will work like I want it to with this setup. Being able to have the projector at a set mounted lens distance of 11’3” and then switching from full screen height/width 128” 2.35 to full screen height 103” pillar boxed 16:9 depending on the content I’m watching by just reaching up and moving the zoom ring from min to max (which would easy…no fine tuning needed , it’d just be all the way left or all the way right) would be awesome.

One other concern though is that I’d really rather not put my seating farther back than 12’ from the wall. I think if the projector was in front of the seating instead of basically above it, then it would bug me since I’d see it in the top edge of my vision. This isn’t a problem with 16:9 content as 12’ fits in the recommended seating distances given. With a 128” 2.35 screen though it shows the minimum recommended seating as 13’9”…………would it really suck and lead to eyestrain to be 1’9” closer than the minimum recommended distance or am I again overthinking things.

I guess one other concern would be that multi-format movies like the Dark Knight would kinda stink I suppose but that’s the case no matter what screen you have unless you have motorized masking right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
For variable aspect movies like the Dark Knight, check out a Lumagen. Go to youtube and check out the video demonstration by Brolic Beast on how he deals with movies like this on a 2:35 screen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,698 Posts
The 1070 just doesn't have enough zoom range/lens shift for the zoom method for a 2:35 screen. You would need to move the projector closer to fill the full width of a 2:35 screen and also move the projector up a few inches. An expensive A lens is the only true solution. The Lumagen will work but resolution loss on 16:9 material would be apparent. The cheapest solution is the Panny AE8000 with power zoom/shift. When most projectors zoom to a larger image the picture expands downward (when ceiling mounted) with out lens shift you would need to move the projector up to compensate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,502 Posts
Anyways….just looking for opinions on if I’m overthinking things and if this will work like I want it to with this setup. Being able to have the projector at a set mounted lens distance of 11’3” and then switching from full screen height/width 128” 2.35 to full screen height 103” pillar boxed 16:9 depending on the content I’m watching by just reaching up and moving the zoom ring from min to max
[EDIT: Just saw rekbone's reply above which covers what I'm saying. Didn't see it when I posted mine]
It's not quite that simple.
1. The lens will require re-focusing when you change the zoom; this may not be too big a deal but...
2. Worse, changing the zoom will also shift the image up/down, so you will also need to change the lens offset. The change may exceed what the W1070 provides. Even if the offset has sufficient range, the adjustment is still a PITA, requiring the use a screwdriver and is very "jumpy". You were concerned with a mismatch of fraction of an inch in screen height; trying to align the height with the crude offset adjustment would be a nightmare.
3. Your calculation is based on the nominal zoom ratio of 1.3. Any minor tolerance (almost inevitable), e.g., 1.26 instead of 1.30, would mean the picture size would be a few inches off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Hmmm...well i definitely don't want to have to fine tune anything anytime i want to switch between aspect ratios...whole reason i was so excited was that it seemed like i could switch back and forth in a couple seconds.

And i can't afford any of the solutions that require extra equipment....one day when I eventually upgrade the projector i'll go down that road but I can't afford it now since I'm also purchasing all the audio equipment as well.

Looks like i'll stick with the original plan of a 16:9 106" screen....seeing as this will be my first projector (and first home theater in general) basically any size is going to be awesome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
247 Posts
Hmmm...well i definitely don't want to have to fine tune anything anytime i want to switch between aspect ratios...whole reason i was so excited was that it seemed like i could switch back and forth in a couple seconds.

And i can't afford any of the solutions that require extra equipment....one day when I eventually upgrade the projector i'll go down that road but I can't afford it now since I'm also purchasing all the audio equipment as well.

Looks like i'll stick with the original plan of a 16:9 106" screen....seeing as this will be my first projector (and first home theater in general) basically any size is going to be awesome.
I have a w1070 for two years and a electric non-tensioned 106" budget screen that has developed wrinkles. It's only now that i'm starting to have "issues" with PQ and screen quality. I have already created a manual masking system.

What i'm saying is that you are going to enjoy your projector for sure, so don't worry. But if you have any second thoughts about screen aspect ratio, maybe you should still think the option of a 1:2.35 screen, since you'll keep the screen longer than any projector.

Later you can get a Lumagen mini used( i got one for 700+$ from this site) and have aspect ratio management. Without a lumagen you could also use the 1/2 zoom option of an Oppo player which helps you watch 16:9 on a 1:2.35 screen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,030 Posts
Hmmm...well i definitely don't want to have to fine tune anything anytime i want to switch between aspect ratios...whole reason i was so excited was that it seemed like i could switch back and forth in a couple seconds.

And i can't afford any of the solutions that require extra equipment....one day when I eventually upgrade the projector i'll go down that road but I can't afford it now since I'm also purchasing all the audio equipment as well.

Looks like i'll stick with the original plan of a 16:9 106" screen....seeing as this will be my first projector (and first home theater in general) basically any size is going to be awesome.

It will be awesome! Most of us started with 16:9 screens too. In fact, someday you might find that just adding a wider 2.35:1 electric screen to your existing 16:9 screen to be the best of both worlds. In the mean time, enjoy your 106" picture ! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,502 Posts
In fact, someday you might find that just adding a wider 2.35:1 electric screen to your existing 16:9 screen to be the best of both worlds. In the mean time, enjoy your 106" picture ! :)
Does any one use two projectors, one for each aspect ratio, on a 2.35 screen? I found that both Panasonic PT-AE8000U and the JVC DLA-X30 require fine tuning manually, when switching between lens memories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,030 Posts
Does any one use two projectors, one for each aspect ratio, on a 2.35 screen? I found that both Panasonic PT-AE8000U and the JVC DLA-X30 require fine tuning manually, when switching between lens memories.

Technically I'm using two projectors on two different aspect ratio screens - I tend to use my Sim Lumis on my 16:9 screen, and my VW600 on my 2.35:1 screen.


Does that count ? :)
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top