Went 16:9 after all, Elunevision AudioWeave (2.35:1 Electric screen without anamorphic lens?)

[psg]

Hi all,

This spring, I want to add an electric screen to my media room for movies. It would drop down in front of my plasma (50" on the picture, but eventually a 65") and stay above my center La Scala. Yes it would partially block that door when lowered...

I am height-limited to about the equivalent of a 16:9 106" screen. That
corresponds to a width of 93.3" and a height of 52.5", only 39.7 of
which would be used on a regular 2.35:1 movie for a projected area of
25.7 square feet. If I keep the same 52.5" height on a 2.35:1 screen, I
can get up to 123.4" wide for a total of 45 square feet (a ratio of
1.75, or nearly twice the picture!).



I sit about 10 feet away from the screen. Would it be too big? What is
the maximum recommended width of a screen at that distance? (Or, what's
the max recommended angle?)



Of course, I would project black bars outside the screen doing this (I am not getting a super expensive anamorphic lens)and some of that might get projected onto the drop ceiling. Is this a big deal?

I would have to zoom in the projector (none bought yet) for the rare 16:9
content and then have white screen on the sides (which seems better
than white screen on the top and bottom anyway). Ideally, I would
install the projector at the back of the room, 18 feet away, with some horizontal and vertical shift, and I
don't really know if these constraints are even possible with today's
affordable ($2000?) 1080p projectors. I think the popular Panny model would do all this.

Am I on the right rack, or should I forget about a 2.35:1 screen?

[Youthman]

I sit at 11' from my 103" screen. If I had a few feet wider room, I would have gone with a 110" or even a 120" screen. I REALLY am glad I went with the 2.35:1 screen. Think about this...if you want something different than what a standard 16:9 tv can offer, go for it. I don't think you will regret it one bit. Love my Panny. Great projector if you can control the lighting. It wouldn't be too great if you have a lot of ambient light but with your setup, you can use the TV for regular viewing and the projection for movie time.

[IHOPsOPEN]

Would it be too big?

I sit about 12ft from a 106" screen, and if the space were available I'd put in a 150"... The bigger the better.

[psg]

Thanks guys!

I sit at 11' from my 103" screen. If I had a few feet wider room, I would have gone with a 110" or even a 120" screen. I REALLY am glad I went with the 2.35:1 screen.

Do you use an anamorphic lens? Or do you oevrshoot the black?

[psg]

Great projector if you can control the lighting. It wouldn't be too great if you have a lot of ambient light but with your setup, you can use the TV for regular viewing and the projection for movie time.

Forgot to say... the room has no windows at all. [H]

[Youthman]

Forgot to say... the room has no windows at all

Perfect! Are you looking at the Panny AE4000u?

Yes, I overshoot the grey bars. My false wall is grey and black so they blend in perfectly.

The zoom memory on the Panny allows you to set presets. I have one for 16:9 and one for 2.35:1. Works great!

[Pronex]

I went with the panny after talking a lot with Youth about it. I absolutely love it. I overshoot the grey bars right onto a light colored wall. Yea, you can see them if you look, but in all honesty they disappear, to my eyes, when I watch a movie. They shouldn't bother you at all.

[psg]

Great stuff guys, thanks!

Yeah, the Panny is on the short list!

[JJkizak]

You might check the AVS forum for more data on this very subject. They have a system for eliminating the black bars. Probably expensive though.

JJK

[psg]

Yeah, I was just wondering what the "audio" people do here. The video people on AVS spit on not using an anamorphic lens. []

[rplace]

For sure you want a 2.35:1 screen. It is the ONLY way to go for movies. Even more so since you already have a TV for HD sized content. I think you are well in the ball park for what the panny can do for you. I am going from memory here but IIRC my screen is 96" I sit about 13 feet back in an 18 foot room and my projector is about 15 feet back. There is enough throw in the standard lense that I can make any content from old school "square-ish" TV all the way to 2.35 fill the entire screen top to bottom. The only black bars I ever have is on the sides. Any movie format fills your entire field of vision. It feels every bit as good or better than any movie house I have been in sitting in the center of the theater in the front 1/3 of the auditorium...does that make sense? I believe there is a limit to bigger is better as when the screen gets too wide for your sitting location I feel like you are looking side to side. Much like being in the first few rows of a theater.

Check out the calculator here it can give you all sorts of info for a given projector. You can figure out how far to put the projector given you screen size, etc.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/projection-calculator-pro.cfm

[psg]

Thanks. I appear to be within the parameter space of the Panny if I get a screen with at least 1.4 gain.

I was thinking of an electric screen by Elunevision, available in Canada from www.eastporters.com. To get 1.4 gain, there's the Luna HD in Vivid Pro-Ciname Grey with 1.8 gain. How is a grey screen?

http://www.eastporters.com/estore/cart.php?target=category&category_id=34' class="style7">

[rplace]

When I built my HT I got samples from a few different companies. Ask them they will send them to you. I got pieces about 18 inches square and put them up on the wall...I already had my projector by then. I played around a bit with them all. I was guessing I would like a gray screen best, but to my surpirse I liked the brilliant white (1.4 Gain) the best. I ended up with a Carada screen, to me best looking no matter the price. I was considering Da-Lite, Stewart and Carada. Not sue if Carada makes movable screen or only fixed. Great customer service they are willing to take a lot of time with you and answer any and all questions.

[garyrc]

WIth a good Blu-ray transfer (not dvd) it should be possible to sit one screen width away. As a point of reference, one screen width away produces an image on your retinas of about the size you would see in the 20th row from the screen (rows more closely spaced than in newly built stadium seating today) in one of the 70 mm Todd-AO houses equipped by Magna theatre corp, back when 70 mm theaters had gargantuan screens.. The image seemed very big indeed from that row, but many people sat closer. This image is larger on the retina from row 20 in one of those theaters than it would be in a traditional movie palace, partly because of all the stuff in the way in a traditional theater: orchestra pit, organ, stage, etc.

IMO, most people sit too far away, both at home and in the theater. Those who say they don't see grain -- even fine grain -- in a theater projecting real film are way too far away, IMO. Emotional impact and suspension of disbelief tend to increase as you move closer. Although a few movies (Blair Witch Project) might cause you to want you to move back, some (2001: A Space Odyssey) will cry out to you to move closer -- much closer. The limiting factor here is Blu-ray, as good as it is. To fully capture the detail in the 65 mm color negative of the 70 mm Lawrence of Arabia it took 8K. Same with Baraka. The detail was presumably captured, but we will have to wait for a better home format than Blu-ray to see that detail at home. It was wise of them to use 8K, though, because the masters will be ready and waiting for that format. Meanwhile, there are those who think that more detail makes it through to the Blu-ray disk when mastering at 8k than it would at, say, 4K. In a 70 mm theater (Century 21, San Jose), 2001: A Space Odyssey was sharp and clear from the first row, which was maybe 1 / 8 screen width away from the 85 foot, deeply curving, screen.

[psg]

Okay, I am finally deciding to do this. I have sent an inquiry for eastporters.com for quote an a 118-inch wide (130 in diagonal) Reference series tab-tensioned electric screen. I think I want white since I have total light control (no wIndows), although it wouldn't have the 1.4 gain recommended above.

I'd be sitting one screen width away from the screen !

[MikeFord]

Wow, that would be just too close for me. Before locking in I suggest going to a movie theater during a VERY slow time and trying a few different distances.

Remember this isn't an eye test, its a movie, anytime you are conscious of any screen artifacts, the movie experience is reduced. This includes, wow my screen image is sharp, you really should not be noticing anything except the movie.

[garyrc]

Even if you (or I) could afford a special anamorphic lens, would it help Blu-ray at all? I think Blu-ray does not use anamorphic processing because they think the resolution is high enough to permit zooming out, just as you and I will do. If this is true, when I get a projector, I will slowly replace my favorite 2.2:1 to 2.75:1 DVDs as the Blu-rays come out ... I could replace about 50 of them and not even approach the anamorphic lens price.

[cornfedksboy]

Okay, so I'm going to be totally in the minority here, but...I ACTUALLY prefer my 16:9 screen over a 2.35:1 or similar. Perhaps it's my usage. I watch an equal amount of TV and older DVDs as what I watch in Blu-Ray. So when I watch HD television, whether it be Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire, or whatever might be a good film on Starz HD, the movie fills my entire wall, basically from right above my subs to my ceiling. The picture is huge and encompasing!

So what about 2.35:1 content? Well, I have no windows and no ambient light and I use a low cost "Cinema Quality Matte White" screen with 1.2 gain along with my Epson 8350. I can't see the black bars at the top and bottom. There is no "distracting" letter-boxing interfering with the experience. The picture just seemlessly blends into space.

I just thought I would throw that out there (kinda JasonJCarney-ish) as a differing opinion. I won't disagree with anyone else's take on this, but for my use, I wouldn't have it any other way.

FWIW, I sit 12 foot from my 9 foot diagnol (8 foot width) screen.

[Youthman]

2.35:1 is not for everyone. I only watch bluray in the HT so for me, 16:9 isn't an option.

[Cal Blacksmith]

We have 16:9 119" and sit about 10 feet back or about the diag of the screen, away from it. For me this is very comfortable.
For others though it may not be. As has been said above, try some different viewing distances at a megaplex to make sure you are good with what you are going to see.

We view about 80% movies both on DVD and BD with the remaining 20% sports and gaming. I have a constant width screen setup so we get black bars on top and bottom. This does not bother us but if it does you then you need to address that.

There are other things such as contrast, viewing angle and projection angle to account for when buying your screen so make sure you have that ironed out before plunking down those hard earned bills

Other than that, Congrats on reaching this stage of construction for your HT! I know you will enjoy it for many years to come!