Help a rooney! 16:9 or 4:3

[Bam!]

Duders!

Hey guys!

Just bought a high Power Da Lite 2.8 Gain screen!

woooo whooooo!

Replacing my matte white .8 gain....4:3


Question though

I watch movies
I watch Musical DvDs (4:3 native format most)
I play PS2 ops:

What should I get ?

Will the Ps2 work on a 16:9....or will the image be chopped on each side ?

Merci Buckets!

[aud19]

Bam you're going to have have really bad black levels with a 2.8 gain screen...

Go 16:9 though whatever you do.

Jason

[George Bellefontaine]

I heartily agree with Jason, Bam.

[JonMarsh]

Actually, his absolute contrast levels may be higher with the DA-LITE High Power, but due to it's gain, the apparent brightness of the 0 IRE black level will be higher.

The subjective performance will depend a great deal on the room lighting situation. The High Power, becuase it is retroreflective, is good at rejecting off axis illumination- so in a room which isn't totally light controlled, it may peform better than some other screen types in terms of checkerboard contrast, for example. An optimimal setup for the High Power screen is with some back or bias lighting behind the screen, if you want some lighting in the room (so you can see your remote or controller, for example!).

Being retro-relfective, it's intended for use with table mounted projectors, not ceiling mount. But this is what also makes it effective at lowering the influence of off axis (scattered) light.

Regards,

Jon

[Lex]

The subjective level may also depend on NOT having something there for comparison. I looked at several samples including a higher gain sample before getting my screen, and I personally think the higher gain does wash out blacks to much. However, without something to compare to a person may be fairly happy. However, the color contrast won't be as "effective" without darker blacks, and thus not as "film like".

As for 4:3 and 16:9, does your PJ do both modes? If so, well, the answer is fairly obvious. you can't make a 4:3 screen out of a 16:9 screen without adjusting the lens throw and shrinking the image. Some may change enough to accomplish this. So, if you want to maximize both image sizes, only the 4:3 screen will do that. I personally have a 4:3, and I don't find the screen above and below the 16:9 border distracting, but some might. I have considered building a mask of some kind for mine, but as yet have not done so.

Lex

[Bam!]

Thanks duders!

So what are you saying ? I high gain screen is not really good ?

My projector is an X1...ceiling mounted.....92" diagonal


What exactly are you saying....I should really stay with my 0.8 gain matte white Da lite screen ?

I so confuthed! :lol: :lol:

[LEVESQUE]

Theory is one thing. Seeing it is another thing.

I use a 110'' Hi-Power with my JVC D-ILA HX-1U, and my blacks, in my totally controlled room (no windows, black carpet, black ceilings), are really good. I have 2 CRT displays also in my house, so I know how good blacks are suppose to look like.

The colors are so vivid and "popping" with the Hi-Power, I still can't believe it.

I know alot of JVC SX21 owners who use a Hi-Power with really good results also.

I think BAM did make a good choice. :T

Be ready for those vibrant colors my friend!

[aud19]

Bam basically chip based FP's tend to have less than good black levels but high output levels. So they can only produce dark grays as opposed to true deep blacks but can produce super-bright whites. That's why most chip-based FP owners usually have slightly negative-gain screens as it increases your ability to project a darker grey or more convincing black level while the projector, with it's high light output, can still produce a convincing white. At most I'd go with a 1.0 gain screen but nothing as high as 2.8, IMO anyways....

Also for the screen shape... there's only going to be more and more 16:9 material and less and less 4:3 material as time goes by... I'd buy for what's coming not for what was...

Jason

[Lex]

Bam, the major ponit is, there is the plus of vibrant bright colors, but at the cost of LESS black BLACKs. For some, it's what they want. For others, any loss in blacks is not a good thing.

All projectors are a little different and all people are a little different, not to mention screens. I'm just saying my own personal choice. You'll just have to decide for yourself what's right. I don't really think anyone can tell you that for sure due to all the variables.

Lex

[Bam!]

Thanks Doug! :T

Me comprendez......

[Lex]

Jason, good post. But I still hold to 4:3 for some things. The flexibility of having a 4:3 and a 16:9 projector is nice, and if I had a 16:9 screen, I wouldn't have as big a 4:3 picture. Now, I will admit, I even run 16:9 mode a lot on my 4:3. but for non HD sports, like football, I go 4:3 all the way.

Bam, your welcome. Part of why high gain screens don't interest me is that it makes the colors to "candy like", and the loss of deep blacks just takes away some of the contrast important in a film presentation. When the lights are low, and shadows are draped across someone's face for example, you want to be able to see that as part of the movie presentation. Just ask Bob, our resident Hollywood lighting expert. he doesn't make all that money to have his light presentation screwed up by to bright a picture. If you want to see some excellent work by Bob, just watch that Val Kilmer movie The Ghost of the Darkness.

Film is about realism, and if you punch up the colors beyond what they are truly supposed to be, it becomes less film like in my opionion and to much like it came out of the spring clothing section, or the candy store.

Lex

[Brandon B]

Also have a highpower. Yes, your blacks are less black, but your whites are MORE white.

In scenes of mixed brightness imagery, net effect zero. In all low IRE scenes, you will notice that black areas are glowing.

The only time this takes me out of the movie in my setup is when the screen does an all-fade-to-black. You then realize you are sitting there looking at a large grey rectangle.

The rest of the time, the punchiness of the image is wonderful. Don't agree with Lex' assessment of this though. If your colors are "candied up", you have not calibrated your setup correctly. An overall brighter image is not the same thing as just boosting color level. And it adds an element of realism to outdoor and other bright scenes lacking in a dimmer setup. Sort of the counterpoint to his point about shadows. I think his preferences and mine are at odds though, so no point in arguing.

After having this for a couple of years now, there is no chance I will ever go back to a low foot-lambert setup unless there are some huge improvements in other areas I am otherwise unable to get.

And as Jon says, the retro-reflective nature of the highpower is really nice at minimizing the effect of any ambient or reflected spill source.

Last and small advantage, the surface of the highpower is very easily washed if it gets some schmutz on it (damn moths on the screen when you roll it up).

As to the 4:3 vs. 16:9 thing, there are a whole raft of issues there. What's the format of your most important source? How does your PJ look resolution-wise maxed out at your intended screen size in either format?

Can tell you after having my setup for about 2 years what I have come to realize. I have a 120" diagonal 16:9 format screen as well as projector. When I watch 4:3 material, I really don't mind it being narrower than the 16:9, even when it is an older film as opposed to some TV source. What does bother me is when I watch a 2.35 film, and it is SMALLER than a 1.85 film. This even bothers my wife, as this is the opposite of how this is treated in a real theater. So much so, that as soon as it is feasible, we are going to go to a 2.35 AR constant height setup by buying a lens to perform the stretch. This will probably be at the same time as my next PJ purchase, as the resolution of my present PJ won't support going wider at my screen size and PJ resolution.

What you should take from this is that you may find that if you have a 4:3 screen, and watch 1.85 and 2.35 material in the middle of that, you are effectively making the media that should be wider, just shorter instead. Sort of diminishes the intended impact of w-i-d-e screen movies as they are intended to be shown.

BB

[Bam!]

Brandon!

Thanks so much for that....

I was starting to fell eery about the high gain screen purchase :cry:

As for the dimensions....My wife wants 4:3. The duder has a ton of movies in freakin' 4:3 and she doesn' t want anything cut off. As much as I argue with her there is a no go. The thing is she is so great with letting me be a spoiled bratt....that for the few times she asks for something I'll cave in....

Thanks a bunch duders!

So it is ordered and on its way! wooooo whoooooo!!!!

[LEVESQUE]

Brandon.

That's exactly what I said.

Theory is one thing. Seeing it for real in your room is another thing completely.

I did compare the Marantz S3 with my HX-1U on my Hi-Power and the difference in CR was not night and day, like some poeple think it is.

I had the money to buy any of those 2 projectors, and I went with the better colors, not the better blacks. But it's a personnal choice.

The Hi-Power is an awesome material. You should see the look of friends and neighbors when they see my set-up for the 1st time. One of my neighbors own a Sony plasma, and made that remark to me that it was like having a giant plasma in my room. He didn't believe it.

50ftl can have this effect on someone! :B

[Bam!]

Finally I have the answer!

Hey duders!

Well I went to go see the High Power in person!

Sold. Period.

There are no hot spots....
As for the sweet spot...It is sweet all right...
Out od the sweet spot...I have a 1.0 Gain...just like my matte white....so ?

Blacks are blacks my friends...
Colors are vivid and crisp and true without being faded out or too plastic like....

Sold. High Power here I come!

The projector had the same lumens as mine....

[JonMarsh]

Congrats, Bam. I have a soft spot in my heart for the High Power screen material, too. I expect you'll probably be quite happy with it.

What size is the screen you're getting?

Enjoy!


~Jon

[LEVESQUE]

Congrats Bam! :T

That's what happen when people are relying too much on theory and specs... You would have miss this awesome screen!

Theory is one thing. But seeing it is another thing completely...

[Bam!]

Jon!

100 inch.... 4:3 ops:

LEVESQUE! :T

[Burke Strickland]

Bam! -

Now that ypou've seen it for yourself, and have chosen to go with it, I'm pretty sure you will be very pleased with the DaLite High Power screen while using it for years to come. It has all the positive attirbutes you have described and in addition, it is both washable and durable. (I've scrubbed mine a couple of times to remove accumulated layers of dust and occasional bug splats.) :>)

Bill Cushman, who reviews projectors for "Widescreen Review" (and formerly for "The Perfect Vision") says that although he has both Firehawk and Greyhawk screens on hand for testing, when he sits down to watch a movie or projected HDTV for pleasure, he prefers his DaLite High Power screen.

So you are in good company!

Enjoy -

Burke

[aud19]

4:3 Booooooooo! :nonod:

:blink:

:

Jason

[Burke Strickland]

While the choice, ultimately, is an individual decision (even if it is wrong), :>) I'd have to agree with Jason on the SHAPE of the screen (even though it isn't Halloween). :>) What Brandon said, too.

With so much material coming out in wide screen format (including TV as more and more goes high def) and with the "gee whiz" factor that spreading out the image from a near square box to a much wider but same height image gives (rather than scrunching down the image from a humongous 4:3 '"square" to a 1:2.35 "envelope slot"), I'd go for either a 16:9 screen (which is what I currently have) or 1:2.35 screen (which is what I'd buy if I were getting a new one today), as wide as possible for the space, either of which would still yield a decent sized 4:3 image but get really dramatic with a wide screen image.

Despite what the "experts" at places like Projector Central counsel regarding the choice of 4:3 versus a wide screen format, I still think the wide screen formats give the best of both worlds, being able to properly accommodate "academy ratio" (traditional TV-shape) images while really opening up for the wide screen stuff without suppressing pixels or "wasting" a lot of screen territory. But if all you ever plan to watch is current or past lo-rez 4:3 format TV shows and films shot before 1953, then 4:3 is definitely the way to go. :>)