AVS Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just received my Stewart Firehawk sst, VeLux finish cinescope screen. Honestly, I wasn't expecting it to be silver, I must have overlooked that point. However, I am very happy with the picture of the screen.


So, will this screen be able to project a 3D image like the movie theaters if I purchase another panasonic ae4000? And then I could use the theater glasses?


If not, then I'll just buy an optima 3D projector, if it will, then cool
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Dual projector polarised 3D is superior to single units in a few ways (unless you have a 2 units in one box type of projector like the LG CF3D), it makes sense to want a dual projector setup if you're a 3D enthusiast with enough money to spend


The simple silver-like aspect of the screen may reproduce the effect of silver-screens but it won't necessarily make it a good screen for polarised 3D. What you need is the specific ability to maintain polarisation, and there is no way to tell other than to take polarising filters and test it

It may work, or it may not. Stewart sells a dedicated screen material for polarised 3D which is the current reference. You can bet the Firehawk sst won't look as good, but whether it produces a watchable 3D image is completely unknown to me.


Your best bet would be to ask Stewart directly, they are probably the only ones who may have already tested it (or who could measure the polarisation extinction ratio).
 

·
DIY Granddad (w/help)
Joined
·
24,840 Posts
The answer is no. The "Silver" designation does not refer to any actual "Metalized" content such as a true Silver. Or Aluminum


A highly reflective Metal content, something that will retain the Polarization of the Projected light is absolutely essential for Passive 3D. Honestly, the only Mfg Screens that qualify to the extent where performance is acceptable/more than would be the Black Diamond II (1.4 gain) and the "3D Specific" Stewart.


Both are pricey, but the BD II at least will do 2D with very little compromise as far as overt Hot Spotting because of it's "Reflective Black Screen" design, while the Stewart has a surface that depends upon it's ultra "Bright" reflective surface to maintain gain under 3D content.


Most know I make all my Screens, and at this level and for Passive 3D usage they are indeed both Dark, and rife with a high percentage of real Metallic content. Only the BDII 1.4 matches that criteria as well.


If you are determined to use a twin PJ Passive set-up, both those Pannys set on Full Lamp will easily drive the BD 1.4 to a pleasingly bright level, yet you'll certainly still only need one of the PJs in action for 2D. However if both are employed and utilize the correct Software, you can experience HDx4 resolution when viewing 2D HD material. (...just as can/does the CF3D below...)


I've had no small amount of recent experience with the LG CF3D recently, testing painted screens (100" to 200") with various levels of Metallic Content and High Gain attributes against that particular PJ's 3D capabilities. I've seen Passive 3D at it's finest....it's a purely joyous experience. Now,when I go backwards and view a Active System with Shutter Glasses, be it projected at Home or the Theater, or as seen on a Direct View TV, it (the image) seems dismally dull, unless the Projection screen is of such a high gain that it offsets the light lost through Software/Lens attenuation. And if that is the case, then the Screen is certain to be too bright to be useful under normal 2D projection.


Yes, two uber Bright DLPs (...that's a lot of Hardware to deal with...) or one Laser Cannon-like 3D-DLP PJ can help mitigate that scenario, but cost a complexity of installation does not seem worth it. And those bulky Glasses!!!! Nossir....don't like 'em.


Direct View Active Sequential 3D performance is just not to be mentioned in comparison, the differences are just too far removed from the "Passive 3D" other.


In truth though, your pretty much going down a more expensive path than needed as well. Myself...in your position considering 2 LCD units, I'd get two Epson 8350s, save a bundle there, have proportionately more lumens to utilize, (...with the possibility of utilizing Low Lamp Mode yet retaining brightness...) and spend for the BDII 1.4 and the best Polarization Filters you can manage.


The rest would be history.


Your probably committed past that consideration at this point though.....


So your best bet would seem to wait, and choose an upcoming "Active" 3D DLP with the most lumens possible on hand. Optoma makes a 4k Lumen unit now but it's "Dynamic" contrast ratio is a dismal 2.5K:1 Hopefully soon, that aspect of performance will improve. Might be pretty hard though because with DLPs, the brighter the PJ, the further Contrast suffers.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
563 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
That answers my question fully, thanks!


At this time, since I already own the projector and screen, if I do any sort of 3D, then I will just purchase an optima hd66 for 5-600 dollars...that is even if the wife will allow it!


Thanks for all the info!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Hi Mississippi man !


I've also read that the BD II was good at maintaining polarisation, but I cannot find any information regarding how good it is at doing so. I cannot find any polarisation extinction ratio information anywhere or even a picture of how the picture looks like through the glasses. Have you had the opportunity to try the BD II when you still had the LG CF3D ?


I currently use a 600€ Harkness screen mounted on a DIY frame (by the way thanks for the advice you gave me in the DIY section). I read the Harkness silver-screen comes very close to the Stewart one, but the shimmering of the aluminium flakes and the hotspotting are beginning to annoy me more an more every day.

I'm starting to consider upgrading to the BD II but it's really a considerable investment, that screen is almost 5x the price of my current one. I cannot make such a decision without being absolutely sure about it's true ability to maintain polarisation.

Do you have more info on the BD II about it ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,188 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan /forum/post/19679621


Now,when I go backwards and view a Active System with Shutter Glasses, be it projected at Home or the Theater, or as seen on a Direct View TV, it (the image) seems dismally dull, unless the Projection screen is of such a high gain that it offsets the light lost through Software/Lens attenuation. And if that is the case, then the Screen is certain to be too bright to be useful under normal 2D projection.

Unless the projector has controls to offset this, like using high lamp and open iris on the new JVC projectors for 3D and low lamp with clamped down iris for 2D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackShark /forum/post/19679818


I currently use a 600 Harkness screen mounted on a DIY frame (by the way thanks for the advice you gave me in the DIY section). I read the Harkness silver-screen comes very close to the Stewart one, but the shimmering of the aluminium flakes and the hotspotting are beginning to annoy me more an more every day.

I'm starting to consider upgrading to the BD II but it's really a considerable investment, that screen is almost 5x the price of my current one. I cannot make such a decision without being absolutely sure about it's true ability to maintain polarisation.

I would suggest getting a sample if that is possible. I don't know if they've changed for the better in this way, but I got early samples of 2 Black Diamond materials and the speckling was really bad to my eyes (but I'm really sensitive to that).


--Darin
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ericglo
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top