AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Time to make a screen. I have a Sony 1292 with 1440 hours on the tubes.


My room is 18.5' x 12.5'.


I will primarily watching 16:9 (and 1.85:1 and 2.35:1) images but also watching a bit of 4:3.


Is it better to have a 4:3 aspect ratio screen (home made) and scale the 16:9 image inside this?


OR


Is it better to have a 16:9 aspect ratio screen (home made) and scale the 4:3 image inside this?


If I go option 1 I am going to get more phosphur wear within my 4:3 image.


If I got option 2 I am going to get more phosphur wear within my 16:9 image.


What should I do? I don;t mind having a 4:3 screen as I am going to create electric masking on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Brenton,


My personal pick is to place a 1.78 instead of 1.85.

The 1:33 will looks 'bigger' (than 1.85), and you still have a 'same' size on 1.85 format.


It is very confusing, I agree.

That's why Stewart make 4-way to accomodate this (not the price).

How do you create the electric masking ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
I don't have a CRT projector, so I cannot speak to phosphur burn, but I have a 16:9 screen and fit a 4:3 image inside. The 4:3 image is still quite impressive. My take is, if you are watching 4:3, then it is probably an old movie with limited picture quality. If you blow up that image to fit a screen that is 7' wide (or bigger), then it will look pretty grainy. You are better off maximizing your better quality media (i.e. newer movies with better transfers and widescreen formats).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
I agree make the better quality material should be bigger. I am comming to screen size conclusion and aspect after testing with just white formica. My screen will be 1.78 apx. as I will have side masking. My closest sitting possition will be 10' and I have decided on a screen height of 36". But do not take my word for it. At the very least get some large white paper sheets and test away...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
16:9.


On a 1292 fed by a Radeon 7200:


10' back, a 6' wide screen is at least good for nearly all DVDs but could be wider for top-notch transfers. On a 4:3 screen, the same width is too revealing on DBS sources and unwatchable for VHS (scaled via dscaler).


Conversely, 4:3 sources fall somewhere between watchable and good on a 54x40.5" slice out of a 72" wide 16:9 screen.


After deciding that 10' worked best on a 72" 16:9 screen, I ordered oen in 87x49" screen so I can put my front row back to the 12' I want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by bergie33
I don't have a CRT projector, so I cannot speak to phosphur burn, but I have a 16:9 screen and fit a 4:3 image inside. The 4:3 image is still quite impressive. My take is, if you are watching 4:3, then it is probably an old movie with limited picture quality. If you blow up that image to fit a screen that is 7' wide (or bigger), then it will look pretty grainy. You are better off maximizing your better quality media (i.e. newer movies with better transfers and widescreen formats).
The 4:3 image will be coming from Pay TV sattelite. I will be running it through a HTPC and using Dscaler so it should look pretty good.


I have a DGTEC HD STB for FTA TV which will be outputting widescreen direcly to the 1292.


Putting the 4:3 image inside the 16:9 size screen was my first thought but if it means that the phosphur will wear within the 16:9 image then I would rather have a 4:3 screen.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top