AVS Forum banner

21 - 40 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
It's completely unnoticeable on the 130 G4 and I sit really close (which makes it worse).
That's very good news. What about the 1.0 screen being "Lambertian," while the 1.3 the center is brighter than the sides? That was another concern not from the review, but that someone else brought to my attention.

I think if I can't mod my projector to be brighter, then it has to be the 1.3 (or even 1.5 one what's it called again) by default. If I can, then maybe it should still be the 1.3, but I like the idea of the image being 1.0 gain across the entire screen.

Basically I was told that the 1.3, it's 1.3 gain in the center, but then as you go to the sides of the screen, it falls to like 0.8 or something. Whereas the 1.0 is 1.0 across the entire screen. So overall, on average, it sounds like the 1.0 is just as bright as the 1.3? Less bright in the center, but more bright on the sides. And since the LED projector I have throws a very consistent image across the entire screen, having a screen that is also consistent across the entire screen may improve the "perceived brightness" and actually look just as bright or brighter as the 1.3? Or no? That's sort of how he explained it to me. Definitely if I'm not going to get a brightness boost overall from 1.3 over 1.0, then I know, for 100%, that I will like the 1.0. I know it is quality and it has nothing a part of it that could possibly cause any problems. So it would be great if that worked but I am really happy that the 1.3 is also a viable alternative and there are no real problems with it except maybe that it's not Lambertian.

I think that might be pretty subtle at 1.3 though. The real issue is, does it detract from the screen being brighter in the first place? 1.3 in the middle is 30% brighter. 0.8 on the sides is 20% less bright. So overall am I really getting more brightness? Especially if it's not Lambertian, that may cause the perceived brightness and uniformity to go down so even if it is 10% brighter on average, it might appear the same or less? What do you think?
 

·
Super Moderator
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
10,863 Posts
That's very good news. What about the 1.0 screen being "Lambertian," while the 1.3 the center is brighter than the sides? That was another concern not from the review, but that someone else brought to my attention.

I think if I can't mod my projector to be brighter, then it has to be the 1.3 (or even 1.5 one what's it called again) by default. If I can, then maybe it should still be the 1.3, but I like the idea of the image being 1.0 gain across the entire screen.

Basically I was told that the 1.3, it's 1.3 gain in the center, but then as you go to the sides of the screen, it falls to like 0.8 or something. Whereas the 1.0 is 1.0 across the entire screen. So overall, on average, it sounds like the 1.0 is just as bright as the 1.3? Less bright in the center, but more bright on the sides. And since the LED projector I have throws a very consistent image across the entire screen, having a screen that is also consistent across the entire screen may improve the "perceived brightness" and actually look just as bright or brighter as the 1.3? Or no? That's sort of how he explained it to me. Definitely if I'm not going to get a brightness boost overall from 1.3 over 1.0, then I know, for 100%, that I will like the 1.0. I know it is quality and it has nothing a part of it that could possibly cause any problems. So it would be great if that worked but I am really happy that the 1.3 is also a viable alternative and there are no real problems with it except maybe that it's not Lambertian.

I think that might be pretty subtle at 1.3 though. The real issue is, does it detract from the screen being brighter in the first place? 1.3 in the middle is 30% brighter. 0.8 on the sides is 20% less bright. So overall am I really getting more brightness? Especially if it's not Lambertian, that may cause the perceived brightness and uniformity to go down so even if it is 10% brighter on average, it might appear the same or less? What do you think?
It's not at all noticeable on the stewart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Technology3456

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
I agree, not on the Stewart. I think what is being described is something that is seen more on the shiny microbead types of high gain screens. The Stewart comes across as just a really, really white matte screen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 · (Edited)
Edited to add graphs and respond about da lite post from earlier also.

I agree, not on the Stewart. I think what is being described is something that is seen more on the shiny microbead types of high gain screens. The Stewart comes across as just a really, really white matte screen.
It's not at all noticeable on the stewart.
I hear you both loud and clear that the grain and viewing angle is not an issue on the Stewart 1.3, but can I ask, is it actually any brighter than the 1.0? If it's true that, even if it's not noticeable, only the center of the screen is 1.3, while the sides become like 0.8, then on average, is the screen even brighter than the 1.0, or just the same brightness but a different, albeit high quality, screen?

Someone sent me this graph for the Stewart 1.3. So if the edge of the screen is already x degrees offset from the center viewing position, you could already be down below 1.0 gain on the edge of the screen instead of 1.3 or even 1.0. Whereas the Studiotek 1.0 is 1.0 across the screen even off angle (I guess? Because it's Lambertian?) so is the 1.3 actually any brighter than the 1.0 or no?
Stewart 1.3 Studiotek G4.JPG

My High Power 2.8 had perfect uniformity and the only reason it's not being replaced with a bigger scope version is because you can't buy the damn things anymore. Uber bright, uniform image from all seating positions. My next screen will either be a Studiotek 100, 130G4 or Dreamscreen v7, but it'd be a High Power if they were still in production.
Can you explain what this means then?
Da Lite High Power.JPG


If the gain declines sharply at different viewing angles, and if the sides of the screen are a different angle from center seating than the center of the screen, then how can it have perfect uniformity?

I am looking to avoid this type of effect:
Hotspotting.JPG


edited
 

·
Super Moderator
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
10,863 Posts
Edited to add graphs and respond about da lite post from earlier also.




I hear you both loud and clear that the grain and viewing angle is not an issue on the Stewart 1.3, but can I ask, is it actually any brighter than the 1.0? If it's true that, even if it's not noticeable, only the center of the screen is 1.3, while the sides become like 0.8, then on average, is the screen even brighter than the 1.0, or just the same brightness but a different, albeit high quality, screen?

Someone sent me this graph for the Stewart 1.3. So if the edge of the screen is already x degrees offset from the center viewing position, you could already be down below 1.0 gain on the edge of the screen instead of 1.3 or even 1.0. Whereas the Studiotek 1.0 is 1.0 across the screen even off angle (I guess? Because it's Lambertian?) so is the 1.3 actually any brighter than the 1.0 or no?
View attachment 3110063


Can you explain what this means then? View attachment 3110061

If the gain declines sharply at different viewing angles, and if the sides of the screen are a different angle from center seating than the center of the screen, then how can it have perfect uniformity?

I am looking to avoid this type of effect: View attachment 3110062

edited
The edges are not as bright as the center but you do not notice it on the Stewart. It's extremely subtle and gradual. It looks nothing like the image above. If I put up a pure white image, it looks purely white. I noticed a big upgrade in brightness going from my old 1.0 screen to the current stewart 130 g4. On my RS4500 I was able to close my iris down another 4 clicks which gained a bit of contrast. Remember when watching, you're most aware of what's in the center.

I use my projector as 4K desktop using the edges constantly. If they were noticeably dimmer I couldn't work that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
The edges are not as bright as the center but you do not notice it on the Stewart. It's extremely subtle and gradual. It looks nothing like the image above. If I put up a pure white image, it looks purely white. I noticed a big upgrade in brightness going from my old 1.0 screen to the current stewart 130 g4. On my RS4500 I was able to close my iris down another 4 clicks which gained a bit of contrast. Remember when watching, you're most aware of what's in the center.

I use my projector as 4K desktop using the edges constantly. If they were noticeably dimmer I couldn't work that way.
What about the High Power 2.8? How could that graph be uniform across the screen even from center viewing?

Edit: and how do the Ultramatte 1.5, and cine neve 1.25 (I think), and UltraMatte 1.3, compare to the 1.0 and 1.3 Studioteks?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,166 Posts
If you were resigned to paying a lot to getting the perfect high gain screen to use for the next decades hopefully, what is the best high gain screen you can buy today bar none?

For a batcave environment. A lot of people seem to think Da-lite High Power 2.8 was the only one that was made that didn't have a lot of issues making the high gain not worth the downsides, and that one is not made anymore. I am wondering if this is the truth of the matter, or if there are new models available today that can perform at least very close to the HP 2.8, if not better? Anything between 1.3 and 3 gain that actually works comparatively well to the HP 2.8 sounds like it would work.
I asked you and your other thread come but I'm just wondering how large of a screen do you want to have? We know you're building a batcave based on your other threads. I think you stated your projector will pump out 775 lumens with its LED light source.

Just wondering if you have a screen size in mind and if you have a preferred seating distance in mind. Your screen size I think you threw around 110 in couple of times.

Only asking cuz it's easy to get swallowed up by all of the information and start looking for things that technically you might not even want.

For instance, my JVC out of the box on my 135-in 16x9 screen was so freaking bright in my batcave... And I think the reviews had it putting out 1700 lumens with the iris fully open and bulb on high. I can imagine you with a 775 lumen projector going for a 3.0 gain screen and getting completely blown away brightness wise if you're sitting directly in front of your screen. in other words, way more lumens thsn your eyes are going to be able to handle comfortably... Sort of like watching a very bright LED TV in a completely dark room.

-T
 

·
Super Moderator
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
10,863 Posts
What about the High Power 2.8? How could that graph be uniform across the screen even from center viewing?

Edit: and how do the Ultramatte 1.5, and cine neve 1.25 (I think), and UltraMatte 1.3, compare to the 1.0 and 1.3 Studioteks?
I have no idea on the High power 2.8 screen I don't think those are even made anymore. The ST130 is nothing like that. The Ultramatte 1.3 and studiotek 130 are the same screen coating just different material - essentially the same screen. The Ultramatte 1.5 had noticeable sparkles to me. I ruled it out. IMO the 130 G4 Studiotek is basically a 1.0 screen that's just brighter without any side effects (they're there but so small most wont notice). It's a marvel of engineering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Technology3456

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
I asked you and your other thread come but I'm just wondering how large of a screen do you want to have? We know you're building a batcave based on your other threads. I think you stated your projector will pump out 775 lumens with its LED light source.

Just wondering if you have a screen size in mind and if you have a preferred seating distance in mind. Your screen size I think you threw around 110 in couple of times.

Only asking cuz it's easy to get swallowed up by all of the information and start looking for things that technically you might not even want.

For instance, my JVC out of the box on my 135-in 16x9 screen was so freaking bright in my batcave... And I think the reviews had it putting out 1700 lumens with the iris fully open and bulb on high. I can imagine you with a 775 lumen projector going for a 3.0 gain screen and getting completely blown away brightness wise if you're sitting directly in front of your screen. in other words, way more lumens thsn your eyes are going to be able to handle comfortably... Sort of like watching a very bright LED TV in a completely dark room.

-T
I wanted 135-140 inches scope screen, but depending how far I'm supposed to toe in my almost 8 inch wide R263 towers on the side of the screen, I don't think more than 130, give or take two inches, will fit, unless I go acoustically transparent and put the speakers behind. Which if Im not even sure I have enough brightness for 130, maybe isnt worth it in the first place. But if I could get more brightness, or a higher gain screen, then I really wonder about that. Im sitting 14 feet away so maybe it should be bigger, I dont know. But outside of AT screens, it would be 130 inches either 2.35:1 or 2.4:1 or 2.37:1, which Im still not sure which of those to do either. I want the projector and the A lens to stretch the image out exactly the same as it was squished. So if my projector squishes it 2.37, I want a 2.37:1 screen and a 2.37:1 A lens, so to speak, so everyone's face on screen is not half an inch wider than it should be, or whatever. But there may be a way, even if your projector squishes only say 2.35:1, to get a 2.4:1 screen and not have the proportions changed at all. But I still do not understand how that would work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Since 2015 in my living room CouchScreen: Die brillanteste Hochkontrastleinwand für Wohnzimmer - best I have ever seen.
I tested all reviewed screens here myself (and more) and this one crushed them all. Videos don't come even close to reality.
But you should follow the installation instruction carefully to get the best result (no hotspot, minimum speckle,...)

You can find a review and pictures in german here - (with ambient light and also in batcave as well) but it's not AT...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Can you explain what this means then? View attachment 3110061
Unlike other screens with gain i've used/seen in the past, there was no subtle hotspot and the edges of the image didn't look any dimmer. To my eyes at least. I'm not sure of the science behind it, but it's something to do with High Power screens being retro reflective rather than angular. To my knoweledge there are very few if any current retro reflective screens in production these days. Move off center and the image wasn't as bright for sure (somewhere around 2 gain), but it looked uniform across the screen. This was with a 3m wide sofa, however, and the experience may be different at more acute angles. The most impressive thing and something I didn't believe until the HP was installed, was zero artifacts. Well, there was the occasional and rare (might notice one every few movies or so) sparkle - like a bright pixel you'd see for a split second and then gone - but nothing like you see with regular screens with gain. Studiotek 130 G3 material (I haven't seen G4) was way worse, for example. Not that they were bad, far from it - just that High Power had no issues at a way higher gain, looked like an enormous flat panel and with none of the weird shimmering in bright scenes/pans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
Edited to add graphs and respond about da lite post from earlier also.




I hear you both loud and clear that the grain and viewing angle is not an issue on the Stewart 1.3, but can I ask, is it actually any brighter than the 1.0? If it's true that, even if it's not noticeable, only the center of the screen is 1.3, while the sides become like 0.8, then on average, is the screen even brighter than the 1.0, or just the same brightness but a different, albeit high quality, screen?

Someone sent me this graph for the Stewart 1.3. So if the edge of the screen is already x degrees offset from the center viewing position, you could already be down below 1.0 gain on the edge of the screen instead of 1.3 or even 1.0. Whereas the Studiotek 1.0 is 1.0 across the screen even off angle (I guess? Because it's Lambertian?) so is the 1.3 actually any brighter than the 1.0 or no?
View attachment 3110063


Can you explain what this means then? View attachment 3110061

If the gain declines sharply at different viewing angles, and if the sides of the screen are a different angle from center seating than the center of the screen, then how can it have perfect uniformity?

I am looking to avoid this type of effect: View attachment 3110062

edited
I think maybe you just need to find a way to see one. The things you’re concerned about are more at the extreme end of high gain screens. The only way I could remotely make mine look like that photo is maybe with small flash photography.

With my screen size and viewing distance, the angle to the very outside edge of the scope screen is about 22°. In the front row that jumps to about 29°, however you start to get close enough to the screen that it’s difficult to take it all in at once.

Even accounting for sitting on the outside seats of the main row, that would put the close edge at 0° and the far edge at 37°, I’ve never perceived any sense of bloom.

I can take photos if you think that would help at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #33 ·
Unlike other screens with gain i've used/seen in the past, there was no subtle hotspot and the edges of the image didn't look any dimmer. To my eyes at least. I'm not sure of the science behind it, but it's something to do with High Power screens being retro reflective rather than angular. To my knoweledge there are very few if any current retro reflective screens in production these days. Move off center and the image wasn't as bright for sure (somewhere around 2 gain), but it looked uniform across the screen. This was with a 3m wide sofa, however, and the experience may be different at more acute angles. The most impressive thing and something I didn't believe until the HP was installed, was zero artifacts. Well, there was the occasional and rare (might notice one every few movies or so) sparkle - like a bright pixel you'd see for a split second and then gone - but nothing like you see with regular screens with gain. Studiotek 130 G3 material (I haven't seen G4) was way worse, for example. Not that they were bad, far from it - just that High Power had no issues at a way higher gain, looked like an enormous flat panel and with none of the weird shimmering in bright scenes/pans.
Can anyone confirm, are there any retroreflective screens made now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
I think maybe you just need to find a way to see one. The things you’re concerned about are more at the extreme end of high gain screens. The only way I could remotely make mine look like that photo is maybe with small flash photography.

With my screen size and viewing distance, the angle to the very outside edge of the scope screen is about 22°. In the front row that jumps to about 29°, however you start to get close enough to the screen that it’s difficult to take it all in at once.

Even accounting for sitting on the outside seats of the main row, that would put the close edge at 0° and the far edge at 37°, I’ve never perceived any sense of bloom.

I can take photos if you think that would help at all.
If it's no trouble, sure photos would be great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
If it's no trouble, sure photos would be great.
Sure. Maybe these are moot anyway since a 1.3 gain screen isn’t really that high gain, and photos aren’t as good as being here, but if anything I’d say the fixed exposure accentuates imperfections compared to what I see.

In looking for content that would focus on this I realized that there’s a non-trivial amount of vignette on a lot of film content. It can be difficult to tell what is due to equipment and what is due to the material being viewed, when just looking at photos taken of the screen. Still, I took some extremely off-angle shots to hopefully point out any variance as you look across the screen.

I’m noticing some moire showing up in some of the images as they get converted for the forum... hopefully this doesn’t end up just looking really bad :)
3110402


33E0E925-7405-4368-B9B2-E861788C0E8F.jpeg

3110398
3110399
3110400


I should mention the shots from the matrix had visible film grain in the video, you may think the white is showing speckles but it’s not the screen, just the video. I see the same watching on my iPhone.

3110393

3110394

3110395

3110396
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,834 Posts
Can you explain what this means then?

If the gain declines sharply at different viewing angles, and if the sides of the screen are a different angle from center seating than the center of the screen, then how can it have perfect uniformity?
Gain vs. angle and uniformity are two different things.

For the HP, for a particular viewing angle and corresponding brightness, the latter is the same across the whole screen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
Is there any benefit to high gain screens that don't have silver, vs ones that do?

I may scrap the polarized 3D idea completely and use color bandpass 3D filters instead, but then I'd need an even higher gain screen because they take more brightness.

What are the best 3 - 4 gain screens on the market with minimal sheen, grain, etc, and decent half gain? Obviously some issues, especially hotspotting, are inevitable, but what is out there?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,166 Posts
Obviously some issues, especially hotspotting, are inevitable, but what is out there?
I cannot help. Only mentioning that when you say hotspotting is gonna happen, that's your cue to think about changing direction. I've seen hotspotting. Ruins the viewing experience for me (and others here).

-T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,655 Posts
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
I cannot help. Only mentioning that when you say hotspotting is gonna happen, that's your cue to think about changing direction. I've seen hotspotting. Ruins the viewing experience for me (and others here).

-T
What DLP direction would you advise me to change towards? As I said before it's not my decision that 4K came out six years ago or whatever it was, but 4K DLP has still barely come out.

As for using high gain screens with my current projectors, for polarized high gain screen options, the Stewart 5D screen, which advertises 2.3 gain, apparently works well, although with a little crosstalk because the extinction ratio is not as high as the grainier more hotspotty 3D screens.

For non-polarized, apparently the Severtson stellar white 2.2 is quite good.

My problem is to reach all the official brightness recommendations, I might be needing 2.5 to 3 gain and that is where there seems to be slim pickings and the options available may ruin the experience as you said.

We shall see. Apparently my projectors have some sort of "overlap" function that will raise the brightness at the expense of color accuracy, if I absolutely need higher brightness for 3D.

Also, apparently in theaters for 3D, often films were projected at 3 foot lambers or 4 foot lamberts. So I'm not sure if I fall down to 10-12 fl, with LED lightsource that may appear like 14fl or 15fl, that the experience will be ruined.

Maybe I will have to go with a slightly smaller screen for 3D, which will trade some impressiveness for perhaps less eye strain and so on.

One way or another, I'm confident it's going to work very well. I am just chasing as close to perfection as is available for my budget, but like everyone else, will have to settle for the best that is possible right now.

Even without overlap, my projectors should appear like 1000 lumen projectors, so worse case scenario, the screen gets a little smaller, I get a stellar white 2.2 or a Stewart 5D or something like that which even work well for 2D, let alone 3D where these issues are less noticeable, and I should be very happy with the results.

Of course ideally, I would be able to make things work on a 1.0 or 1.3 gain screen, even for 3D. That would require projectors that perform, in real life calibrated, around 2000 lumens or maybe higher. If you know any DLP projectors like that with the quality and the features that the current projectors have, I'd like to hear, but it doesn't exist. I think if you can find one of Sim2's bulb projectors with a special alternate lens that sacrifices contrast for brightness, that's the only one, but bulb projectors you have to recalibrate all the time as the bulb gets less bright, so it will only be that bright with a full bulb.

And 3 chip might not be as sharp to align two projectors. But maybe that one would work, I was considering it as well.

For 2D though, it's color gamut is significantly worse than what I got, although it has better contrast and brightness.

Lots of tradeoffs. What I got will work with a 3 gain screen if any exist that wont be too hotspotty, or a 2.2 gain screen and I will make the screen slightly smaller, or use overlap. It might be good to sit a little bit further away from the projector, a foot closer to the screen, so then smaller would be good. There are a lot of solutions that will work very well, I'm just trying to find the best one of them before pulling spending the money, you know how it is. That's just what you have to do with projects like this, even though it's tiresome.

Then I will have a 1.0 gain screen for 2D, and I will have a higher gain screen for 3D, and I will have the 3D equipment. Then in the future when DLP projectors come out or I learn about something available already, in my price range, like what I have now, but twice as bright, all I will have to do is replace my projectors and I can use everything else the same, just no longer use the high gain screen.

Just FYI, my throw distance is near 2:1, which should significantly reduce hotspotting supposedly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,166 Posts
What DLP direction would you advise me to change towards? As I said before it's not my decision that 4K came out six years ago or whatever it was, but 4K DLP has still barely come out.

As for using high gain screens with my current projectors, for polarized high gain screen options, the Stewart 5D screen, which advertises 2.3 gain, apparently works well, although with a little crosstalk because the extinction ratio is not as high as the grainier more hotspotty 3D screens.

For non-polarized, apparently the Severtson stellar white 2.2 is quite good.

My problem is to reach all the official brightness recommendations, I might be needing 2.5 to 3 gain and that is where there seems to be slim pickings and the options available may ruin the experience as you said.

We shall see. Apparently my projectors have some sort of "overlap" function that will raise the brightness at the expense of color accuracy, if I absolutely need higher brightness for 3D.

Also, apparently in theaters for 3D, often films were projected at 3 foot lambers or 4 foot lamberts. So I'm not sure if I fall down to 10-12 fl, with LED lightsource that may appear like 14fl or 15fl, that the experience will be ruined.

Maybe I will have to go with a slightly smaller screen for 3D, which will trade some impressiveness for perhaps less eye strain and so on.

One way or another, I'm confident it's going to work very well. I am just chasing as close to perfection as is available for my budget, but like everyone else, will have to settle for the best that is possible right now.

Even without overlap, my projectors should appear like 1000 lumen projectors, so worse case scenario, the screen gets a little smaller, I get a stellar white 2.2 or a Stewart 5D or something like that which even work well for 2D, let alone 3D where these issues are less noticeable, and I should be very happy with the results.

Of course ideally, I would be able to make things work on a 1.0 or 1.3 gain screen, even for 3D. That would require projectors that perform, in real life calibrated, around 2000 lumens or maybe higher. If you know any DLP projectors like that with the quality and the features that the current projectors have, I'd like to hear, but it doesn't exist. I think if you can find one of Sim2's bulb projectors with a special alternate lens that sacrifices contrast for brightness, that's the only one, but bulb projectors you have to recalibrate all the time as the bulb gets less bright, so it will only be that bright with a full bulb.

And 3 chip might not be as sharp to align two projectors. But maybe that one would work, I was considering it as well.

For 2D though, it's color gamut is significantly worse than what I got, although it has better contrast and brightness.

Lots of tradeoffs. What I got will work with a 3 gain screen if any exist that wont be too hotspotty, or a 2.2 gain screen and I will make the screen slightly smaller, or use overlap. It might be good to sit a little bit further away from the projector, a foot closer to the screen, so then smaller would be good. There are a lot of solutions that will work very well, I'm just trying to find the best one of them before pulling spending the money, you know how it is. That's just what you have to do with projects like this, even though it's tiresome.

Then I will have a 1.0 gain screen for 2D, and I will have a higher gain screen for 3D, and I will have the 3D equipment. Then in the future when DLP projectors come out or I learn about something available already, in my price range, like what I have now, but twice as bright, all I will have to do is replace my projectors and I can use everything else the same, just no longer use the high gain screen.

Just FYI, my throw distance is near 2:1, which should significantly reduce hotspotting supposedly.
I said change direction in terms of going any direction that you need to go to avoid a hotspotting. I was not advocating a new projector. There are many things that you could consider. smaller screen. Sitting closer to the screen. A different screen. Settling for less foot lambers. A multiple of things that you would have to weigh.

I'm not sure if you've seen hotspotting before. But when you see it, your eyes will focus to it multiple times per minute. It's like seeing a stuck pixel turned red on an LCD display. Your eyes always focus to it.

if you don't want to entertain any other ideas, you'll have hotspotting. And you're not going to like it :)

-T
 
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
Top