21 replies to this topic

[Kaklex69]

Hi all,

I have been following this forum for a while now, picked up some great advice. I am in the process of setting up my family room with a projector and a screen. I have a 52" Samsung lcd tv which is for viewing during the day. I am hoping to go scope for I spend my night watching films. My room dimensions are as follows : 3.75 (Seating to Screen) x 3.9 (Screen Wall) and height is 2.70. Any recommendations would be appreciated on helping me make an informed choice.

Thanks, Alex.

[bbar]

Budget and are you sure you want a scope screen versus a 16X9 screen?

[Kaklex69]

My budget is around the $5000 mark. I went pass a store the other day and saw some content on both 16x9 and 2.35x1 screens and the scope blew me away. I feel cheated with a 16x9 cropped. Most of my viewing now is movies. Its movies that give me the wow factor.

[bbar]

A JVC X30 with a 1.26 gain 125" scope screen from Oztheatre at a 4.2 throw should do nicely. It will probably come in closer to 6000 though unless there is a place to get the X30 in the high 3's.

If you go 16:9 screen  then would go a 130" with the likes of the Epson 9000 as it is very popular and can be had a a good price from the GB.  You would even get change from the $5000.

[Owen]

Kaklex69, on 22 May 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

My budget is around the $5000 mark. I went pass a store the other day and saw some content on both 16x9 and 2.35x1 screens and the scope blew me away. I feel cheated with a 16x9 cropped. Most of my viewing now is movies. Its movies that give me the wow factor.

If the 16:9 and scope screen where the same width the picture should have been identical on both.
When using a scope screen the projector will need to be adjusted every time the aspect ratio of the source changes, this is a pain if the projector does not have power zoom and lens shift, preferable with memory like the X30. An X30 with decent screen is over $5k but not by a huge amount.

Since projectors and Bluray are both natively 16:9 there is no need to ever adjust the projector if a 16:9 screen is used, its set and forget.
The screen width will always be filled and the height will vary with the source aspect ratio just as it does on the Bluray disk. 16:9 titles have 1080 active lines so fill the screen height while scope titles have about 800 active lines so there will be black bars above an below. The black bars are encoded in the video and take up the remaining 280 line, about 140 lines of black above and 140 lines below the image.
Once you have seen some of the many super high quality 16:9 Bluray titles you will know what wow factor really is so dont be to hasty in your choice of screen.

If you have a white wall you can project onto it for a while and get a better idea of the pros and cons of scope and 16:9, then go and buy what suits you best.

[ajm]

Owen, on 22 May 2012 - 10:57 PM, said:

Once you have seen some of the many super high quality 16:9 Bluray titles you will know what wow factor really is so dont be to hasty in your choice of screen.

Do you have a list of these Blu-rays? I want to see if I have any in my collection already or if should add them.

[davep]

Looks like Kaklex69 has done the right thing by checking out personally the difference between the two projection methods and found his preference.  Anecdotally from my movie collection (pushing 550), the vast majority of action flicks would be scope, with comedies & rom-coms being relegated to 16:9.  I know which way I would prefer to have a larger, more immersive pic - and I have a 16:9 screen!  I don't normally bother watching documentaries on the big screen, leave that to the lounge room baby 55" screen.

[yorac]

Kaklex69, on 22 May 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

My budget is around the $5000 mark. I went pass a store the other day and saw some content on both 16x9 and 2.35x1 screens and the scope blew me away. I feel cheated with a 16x9 cropped. Most of my viewing now is movies. Its movies that give me the wow factor.

am I missing something the guy has basically said that he wants to go scope, so let's (for once Owen) leave it at respecting what he wants and not your want for posting drivel in others threads..............

[minty]

yorac, on 23 May 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

am I missing something the guy has basically said that he wants to go scope, so let's (for once Owen) leave it at respecting what he wants and not your want for posting drivel in others threads..............

Same old same old mate. Be interesting if any of Owens mates will jump in and defend this latest offering from him. Their quick to attack a "scope zealot" for being over enthusiastic but happy for Owen to bang away in every thread going.

[mmu16]

In Owen's defence, he didn't really say 16:9 is best - just clarified the difference between 16:9 and 2.35:1.  He finished the sentence with "If you have a white wall you can project onto it for a while and get a better idea of the pros and cons of scope and 16:9, then go and buy what suits you best".  No, I actually have a 140" scope screen

[Owen]

No I did not say which was better or which Alex should choose.

Alex said:

Kaklex69, on 22 May 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

I went pass a store the other day and saw some content on both 16x9 and 2.35x1 screens and the scope blew me away.

Was the 16:9 screen the same width as the scope screen, if it was not the comparison is terribly flawed which could lead to an inappropriate choice and disappointment.
Obliviously if both screens are the same width the scope image would look identical on both.

[ajm]

Owen, on 23 May 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

No I did not say which was better or which Alex should choose.

Alex said:



Was the 16:9 screen the same width as the scope screen, if it was not the comparison is terribly flawed which could lead to an inappropriate choice and disappointment.
Obliviously if both screens are the same width the scope image would look identical on both.

Is it really terribly flawed?  Isn't the idea of scope CIH and the width being wider?

And wouldn't it depend as much on the AR of the media?  I would have thought if you compare screens of the same height using a mix of 16:9 and 2.35:1 media then you're getting a very good comparison.

I would think you'd be crazy to buy the same width screen in a 2.35:1 format.

Edited by ajm, 23 May 2012 - 02:19 PM.

[Owen]

ajm, on 23 May 2012 - 02:18 PM, said:

Is it really terribly flawed?  Isn't the idea of scope CIH and the width being wider?

And wouldn't it depend as much on the AR of the media?  I would have thought if you compare screens of the same height using a mix of 16:9 and 2.35:1 media then you're getting a very good comparison.

I would think you'd be crazy to buy the same width screen in a 2.35:1 format.

Problem is that both projectors and Bluray video are 16:9 native and Constant Image Width (CIW) NOT Constant Image Height (CIH). Projecting Bluray scope content with its 800 lines (approx) resolution the same height as 16:9 content with its 1080 line resolution results in a loss of image quality. This may not matter to you but dont assume that others dont or wont care.

Because 16:9 Bluray content has about 33% greater vertical resolution than Bluray scope content it can be display 33% taller (same width as scope) with no quality loss. I would think you'd be crazy not to take advatage of this inescapable fact and enjoy the largest image possible given the limitations of Bluray source, to do that a 16:9 screen is required.

Only a 16:9 screen setup displays all aspect ratios without compromise or favour. Some like you choose to compromise 16:9 images by projecting them smaller than scope, thats your call.

Edited by Owen, 23 May 2012 - 03:47 PM.

[yorac]

Get ready for a further 16 pages of drivel..............




with apologies to the OP, if you have seen something that blew you away then my suggestion is to go with that as you will more than likely regret any other decision.......................



Disclaimer: I am well known for my views on both scope and 16 x 9 here, but am trying to give you a balanced view based on your initial post, there is much enjoyment to be had from the path you are about to head down, stay true to what blows you away and you will be greatly entertained as a rule................

[ajm]

Owen, on 23 May 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

Problem is that both projectors and Bluray video are 16:9 native and Constant Image Width (CIW) NOT Constant Image Height (CIH). Projecting Bluray scope content with its 800 lines (approx) resolution the same height as 16:9 content with its 1080 line resolution results in a loss of image quality. This may not matter to you but dont assume that others dont or wont care.

Because 16:9 Bluray content has about 33% greater vertical resolution than Bluray scope content it can be display 33% taller (same width as scope) with no quality loss. I would think you'd be crazy not to take advatage of this inescapable fact and enjoy the largest image possible given the limitations of Bluray source, to do that a 16:9 screen is required.

Only a 16:9 screen setup displays all aspect ratios without compromise or favour.

Didn't you just say you weren't telling Alex which was better?

Since Alex didn't mention a noticable loss in quality, and neither did you in your first post, I'm not sure why this is suddenly such a dramatic consideration.

Weren't we talking about how to make a comparison that wasn't " terribly flawed"? Surely that's all the advice Alex needs to be able to make an informed decision? Your arguments seem to progress from one "critical" issue to another as if you're ticking them off a checklist.

[Owen]

My response was to you not Alex.

My message to Alex is simple, audition a 16:9 screen the same width as the scope screen you are considering with a variety of Bluray content, both scope and 16:9. If you then think there is an advantage in displaying 16:9 content taller than scope (the same width) as opposed to smaller as would be that case on the same width scope screen you might want to consider a 16:9 screen.

[Vieira4]

But scope just kicks ass without the black bars Owen.

[yorac]

yorac, on 23 May 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Get ready for a further 16 pages of drivel Owen justifying his position.................

fixed..........

[Owen]

Vieira4, on 23 May 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

But scope just kicks ass without the black bars Owen.

If the black bars are black whats the problem? With a high contrast projector they are black enough not to be an issue IMHO.
Unless the wall behind the screen is black its more of a problem than "black bar".

If "black bars" are an issue use masking, that applies no matter what aspect ratio screen you have as there will always be content that does not fit the screen.

Edited by Owen, 23 May 2012 - 07:39 PM.

[Kaklex69]

Hi all,

Wow .... Lots of thoughts on this topic, reminds me of the ferrari versus porsche comparison. Both are very fast, great around a track and probably similar in performance. So why do people choose one over the other and stay loyal to that brand ???? I guess its what plays with their heart strings and wows them. Both totally different philosophies yet same outcome. I guess what WOW's me might not WOW the person sitting right next to me.

Both camps seem to make very valid points ...... There is nothing like a good debate to get you thinking and I thank you all for your input. For me though the picture is half the story of the whole experience. I remember as a young kid going to the cinema and been blown away by the pig picture and the sound. Yes for me the other half of the experience is the sound, the musical score and sound affects that tie in with the film to paint a very real story that engulfs me. I love to be taken away far from the real world and thats what cinema does to me. If in some way I could create something similar at home then that would make me a very happy person.

Alex.

[Owen]

Yes, big picture and big sound is the name of the game, that's why its a good idea to have a screen that is wide enough and tall enough to do justice to whatever you need to display on it, now and in the future. If content came in only one aspect ratio choice of screen would be easy but unfortunately that's not the case and probably never will be.

It's easy and not that expensive to get better picture and sound then is available in a commercial cinema and I'm sure you will be impressed with what you end up with.

[Vieira4]

Owen, on 23 May 2012 - 07:33 PM, said:

If the black bars are black whats the problem? With a high contrast projector they are black enough not to be an issue IMHO.
Unless the wall behind the screen is black its more of a problem than "black bar".

If "black bars" are an issue use masking, that applies no matter what aspect ratio screen you have as there will always be content that does not fit the screen.

Once you have fidelio velvet no black bar looks black enough.