AVS Forum banner

22141 - 22160 of 29499 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
I’d trust Glen’s experience on the zoom...and the JVC calculator is the only one I’ve seen that recognizes the shift limitations with regard to horizontal and vertical, i.e. you trade off one for the other the further you shift. I don’t recall running into “zoom out” issues but I did run into both “zoom in” and the shift issue with my NX7 at about 24’ away, 9’ high and 6-7” off center. I just barely got the vertical shift I needed after moving closer about 4-5”....it was tight and I was a bit surprised. Didn’t discover the JVC calculator until later....
My mistake on shift and zoom, sorry. I mixed up the amount of horizontal or vertical shift can affect the shift available in the other plane.

Glen Carter : Home Theater Calibration : CalMan, Minolta CS-1000, Klein K10, Spyder5, Murideo SIX-G

S9+ using Tapatalk
 

·
aka jfinnie
Joined
·
4,235 Posts
Most, if not all, of these films are absolutely framed by the DP for Scope. There is no "IMAX" on a flat panel display considering that the Scope has, what, a whopping 20" screen height and then the "IMAX" simply fills the top and bottom (open matte) to get all the way to, ya know, Days of Our Lives size!!

A projection room with a super high ceiling could pull off the true "IMAX" experience of overwhelming the visual field, but that's a lot of cash in extra screen and top/bottom masking for a few movies that are beautiful in Scope. So, I'm just fine with my 2.35 CIH. Wouldn't do it any other way.
Watching Interstellar with top / bottom masks closed I find there are quite a lot of scenes where while the framing is broadly "safe" (though a few non-critical bits where heads are cut off in the heat of action), the scenes are left lacking by comparison. Much prefer watching it with the masks open even if my seating doesn't provide IMAX-like height.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
For my in progress theater, I have a diy screen that is about 54"x140" (to cover a window) the throw is 17' and I can zoom to fill the entire screen even wider with the zoom aspect ratio.

I have installation modes for 1.85, 2.00, 2.35, 2.40, full with and minimum zoom. Some duplicates with aspect=zoom.

Glen Carter : Home Theater Calibration : CalMan, Minolta CS-1000, Klein K10, Spyder5, Murideo SIX-G

S9+ using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,196 Posts
Anyone have any ideas on why going into 3D mode disables the Zoom aspect ratio?

Even if you successfully go into Zoom before start the 3D movie, activating 3D shrinks the image back to Auto size, though the Aspect window still says Zoom.

The question is why is this necessary - and can it be avoided by changing something in the setup menu for 3D in the projectors? (I have an RS1000, but I assume this is the same across all the true models covered by this thread.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
671 Posts
Thanks for the information and opinion. I think I will be going with the NX7 now.
Good choice. I went from an Epson 8700 to the RS2000 (NX7) and noticed a dramatic difference in contrast and sharpness. You wont be disappointed.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
840 Posts
Hey guys -- after 5 years of faithful service (and its still running strong) I think I finally have a reason to move out of my Sony VPL-VW500ES. I am thinking the NX7/RS2000.


I currently have a 13'10" throw to 135" screen (1.1 gain). I have a blacked out theater. Will I be able to take advantage of the HDR and wider color gamut capabilities of this projector (i.e., will I have a enough brightness given my screen size). Thanks!


I also think that my throw versus screen size puts me right at the max wide angle per the JVC calculator. Is that an issue? I can move the mount back a foot or so if I needed to -- but just prefer not to poke extra holes in the ceiling. The Sony never had an issue with this throw.


Details of my setup are in the link in my sig.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Anyone have any ideas on why going into 3D mode disables the Zoom aspect ratio?

Even if you successfully go into Zoom before start the 3D movie, activating 3D shrinks the image back to Auto size, though the Aspect window still says Zoom.

The question is why is this necessary - and can it be avoided by changing something in the setup menu for 3D in the projectors? (I have an RS1000, but I assume this is the same across all the true models covered by this thread.)
Although it seems like a bug - given typical 3D frame packed is the equivalent of 1080p48 yet regular 1080p60 scales fine - it has been stated by JVC that there isn't enough processing power to support it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
671 Posts
As I said, these movies played in constant 2.35:1 in the majority of theaters. They only had variable aspect ratio in IMAX theaters, which are like 2% of the global market. By necessity, the films have to be composed to be safe for 2.35:1 projection. The camera viewfinder has 2.35:1 safe zone etchings to ensure this.



Your options for CIH projection at home are:



1) Use the 16:9 zoom setting and watch the majority of the movie shrunken into the center of your screen with black bars on all sides.

2) Leave it zoomed for 2.35:1 and let picture spill onto your wall periodically.

3) Try to ride the zoom control manually every time you see an aspect ratio change. Annoying at best, especially when the IMAX footage may only consist of a 10-15 second establishing shot before a scene starts (many like that in The Dark Knight) or if the movie has rapid-fire scene transitions from one ratio to another (Star Trek into Darkness, the Transformers movies).

4) Apply the projector's electronic masking to crop everything to 2.35:1.



I think you'll find that in the majority of cases, 4 is by far the most preferable option.
Never tried the RS2000s internal masking. So it will place black bars on the top and bottom of a 16x9 picture when zoom is set to 2:35:1? That's a lot of cropping for my 140in diag cinema scope screen.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,512 Posts
Never tried the RS2000s internal masking. So it will place black bars on the top and bottom of a 16x9 picture when zoom is set to 2:35:1? That's a lot of cropping for my 140in diag cinema scope screen.
It can be set to do this, yes. You have to manually adjust the Masking parameter in the menu for the top and bottom separately, and it's a lot of steps to go all the way to 2.35:1. But once you do it, it should save as part of the Installation mode for your 2.35:1 zoom.

As for it being a lot of cropping, that's true. It should only be used for the movies with IMAX variable aspect ratio. Those movies were photographed to be safe for cropping, because they played at constant 2.35:1 in all theaters other than IMAX.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,196 Posts
I simply made a 17:9 screen (to match the projector's native aspect ratio) 11' wide by 5'10" high.

I sit about 11 feet from it.

Anything shot at 1.91:1 or wider I project in the Zoom aspect setting, filling the 11' width, letting a little of the black bars above and below the image be lost off the top and bottom of the imaging panels in the PJ.

Anything shot narrower than 1.91:1 I project in Auto aspect setting, filling the screen vertically and almost filling the screen horizontally (16:9 is 10' 4" wide, a whole 6.5% :eek: narrower than 11').

Variable aspect ratio films I show in Auto. I make this sacrifice of 8" of width (out of a potential 11 feet) so the image can jump to nearly six feet high in the IMAX scenes that are framed to feel like you're in the great outdoors. (Or in the volcano with Spock in Into Darkness.)

Why mask or crop anything off? Just to make the point that 16:9 is an "inferior" aspect ratio? Isn't the framing of the scenes supposed to be the director's artistic choice?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19 Posts
Lens shift does not have any effect on zoom. Anyone can test this. Set projector image centered on projector. Make image as large as you can, then adjust vertical lens shift and you will see that the image size does not reduce. I think Glen realized his mistake, since the post has been pulled.
Yep, and I should have been more clear that my limitation on zoom-in was purely due to the distance from the screen....I solved that by getting a bigger screen....:grin:

I do recommend the JVC calculator for evaluating lens shift ranges if you will be off center horizontally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,512 Posts
Why mask or crop anything off? Just to make the point that 16:9 is an "inferior" aspect ratio?
This is a long discussion we probably don't need to bog this thread down with. But yes, the whole point of scope photography is to be wider than 16:9, not shorter. On a typical 16:9 screen, Star Wars is smaller than The Price Is Right. In fact, that's true even on a 17:9 screen like yours.

The number of movies with an IMAX variable aspect ratio is approximately 0.00000000000000000001% of all movies ever made. And every last one of them was specifically designed to be safe for cropping to 2.35:1 in all theaters other than IMAX. The variable ratio thing is an IMAX exclusive gimmick.

Isn't the framing of the scenes supposed to be the director's artistic choice?
By necessity, the directors compose for both ratios with aspect ratio etchings on the viewfinder. Both versions are legitimate.

Brad Bird, the director of Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, even publicly stated that the variable ratio version was only intended to be seen in IMAX theaters, and that he (the director of the movie) prefers the constant 2.35:1 version because he finds the aspect ratio shifting distracting on regular screen sizes.

Roger Deakins, the cinematographer of Blade Runner 2049, has also badmouthed the IMAX open-matte version of that movie.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,196 Posts
I'll make one final point before leaving this debate and returning this channel to its regularly-scheduled programming:

I find that the varying image heights during this kind of film feel very natural. When you're indoors, you have a lower area overhead, when you're outdoors, you have a higher area.

When done well, the transitions can be very natural - following a character moving outdoors from indoors, the character doesn't have to get smaller in order to include the sky. Instead, the picture can get bigger.

Scope aspect ratio was invented to lure audiences back into movie theaters by offering an experience that movies on 4:3 televisions couldn't match. It too was called a "gimmick."

Before that, film was called a gimmick by the "legitimate" theater.

And I'm sure that the generations of dance bands put out of work by recorded music and radio considered those to be gimmicks too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjmcinnis

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Quick question for NX5 owners. How do I change the Gamma settings? I'm using the latest firmware update, and nothing happens when I click the Gamma button on the remote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,071 Posts
I find that the varying image heights during this kind of film feel very natural.
Please don't encourage them, the only time varying aspects ratio has ANY place at all is if they want to emphasize something for a short period of time, it has no place overall and is just a nuisance. Are you saying you find the black bars or overshooting preferable at times?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
Honestly, it's unlikely any of those are counterfeit, but because JVC indicates they might be, it may be hard to get warranty if you need it.
Contact some of the dealers in this thread for prices like Mike at avscience or cleveland plasma
When I was researching JVC authorized vs non-authorized sellers and counterfeit PJ's, this was my conclusion. JVC will warrant any new JVC PJ bought in the USA, (but only if it was intended for sales in the USA). This means if you get a gray market PJ, it (might) not be warranted by standard USA warranty. This alone drove me to buy from an authorized seller. I want a solid warranty for such an expensive purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,798 Posts
I'll make one final point before leaving this debate and returning this channel to its regularly-scheduled programming:

I find that the varying image heights during this kind of film feel very natural. When you're indoors, you have a lower area overhead, when you're outdoors, you have a higher area.

When done well, the transitions can be very natural - following a character moving outdoors from indoors, the character doesn't have to get smaller in order to include the sky. Instead, the picture can get bigger.

Scope aspect ratio was invented to lure audiences back into movie theaters by offering an experience that movies on 4:3 televisions couldn't match. It too was called a "gimmick."

Before that, film was called a gimmick by the "legitimate" theater.

And I'm sure that the generations of dance bands put out of work by recorded music and radio considered those to be gimmicks too.
When you are outdoors, you also have a much wider field of view.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Hey guys -- after 5 years of faithful service (and its still running strong) I think I finally have a reason to move out of my Sony VPL-VW500ES. I am thinking the NX7/RS2000.


I currently have a 13'10" throw to 135" screen (1.1 gain). I have a blacked out theater. Will I be able to take advantage of the HDR and wider color gamut capabilities of this projector (i.e., will I have a enough brightness given my screen size). Thanks!


I also think that my throw versus screen size puts me right at the max wide angle per the JVC calculator. Is that an issue? I can move the mount back a foot or so if I needed to -- but just prefer not to poke extra holes in the ceiling. The Sony never had an issue with this throw.


Details of my setup are in the link in my sig.


I had the vw500es and replaced it with the rs2000/nx7. My setup is blackout room with 1.1 gain, 128” widescreen on a 14’6” throw distance. A little more than yours with a smaller screen (although mine is widescreen). Without able to quantify, the difference IMHO is considerable. HDR in my setup is amazing, no regrets here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,071 Posts
I had the vw500es and replaced it with the rs2000/nx7. My setup is blackout room with 1.1 gain, 128” widescreen on a 14’6” throw distance. A little more than yours with a smaller screen (although mine is widescreen). Without able to quantify, the difference IMHO is considerable. HDR in my setup is amazing, no regrets here.
It's a decent time to upgrade since Native 4k projectors with DTM will hold their value better, however next year might even be better contrast wise, we shall see. The older JVC's are definitely going to lose a lot of their resell value as Native 4k becomes the standard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,798 Posts
I had the vw500es and replaced it with the rs2000/nx7. My setup is blackout room with 1.1 gain, 128” widescreen on a 14’6” throw distance. A little more than yours with a smaller screen (although mine is widescreen). Without able to quantify, the difference IMHO is considerable. HDR in my setup is amazing, no regrets here.
When using zoom method, the projector throws a 16:9 image. A 135" diagonal 16:9 screen is 118" in width. A 128" diagonal 2.35 screen is also 118" wide. Since gain of your screen and width of your screen is the same as Skrill's, that means brightness if throw was the same would be identical.
 
22141 - 22160 of 29499 Posts
Top