Scope Screen Without An Anamorphic Lens

[RobL]

Looking at the HC5000 specs, it appears (to me) that it can support projecting onto a scope screen with CIH without requiring an anamorphic lens.

It does this via is motorised zoom, focus and inbuilt shutters to give the various aspect ratios (2.35, 1.85, 1.78 etc) without bleeding grey light outside the projector screen.

From reading this forum, I believe BlueRay and HD DVD don't support anamorphic aspect ratio's, instead only ever using 800 odd lines out of 1080 for 2.35 aspect ratio movies, so I cannot see a downside to this (or a reason to use an anamorphic lens), although I'm sure the experts on this forum will correct me

Ideally I would like to ceiling mount the project (on pole if necessary) and use the user memories to automatically zoom, focus, crop and shift the image as required for each ratio. Add some motorized dark roman blinds to each side of the scope screen for side masking and voila, cheap scope home cinema

Can someone with a HC5000 please confirm my understanding is correct.

Also, are there any other projectors on the market with motorized zoom, focus and shutters?

Thanks

-Rob

[Taki]

Without a lens, you're not taking advantage of the full projector panel in terms of resolution and brightness. Even though the source may not be recorded in the full 1080 lines, you'll still get a better picture because the full projector panel is being used.

[norpus]

Without a lens, you're not taking advantage of the full projector panel in terms of resolution and brightness. Even though the source may not be recorded in the full 1080 lines, you'll still get a better picture because the full projector panel is being used.

That is correct

[The_Preacher1973]

Looking at the HC5000 specs, it appears (to me) that it can support projecting onto a scope screen with CIH without requiring an anamorphic lens.

It does this via is motorised zoom, focus and inbuilt shutters to give the various aspect ratios (2.35, 1.85, 1.78 etc) without bleeding grey light outside the projector screen.

From reading this forum, I believe BlueRay and HD DVD don't support anamorphic aspect ratio's, instead only ever using 800 odd lines out of 1080 for 2.35 aspect ratio movies, so I cannot see a downside to this (or a reason to use an anamorphic lens), although I'm sure the experts on this forum will correct me

Ideally I would like to ceiling mount the project (on pole if necessary) and use the user memories to automatically zoom, focus, crop and shift the image as required for each ratio. Add some motorized dark roman blinds to each side of the scope screen for side masking and voila, cheap scope home cinema

Can someone with a HC5000 please confirm my understanding is correct.

Also, are there any other projectors on the market with motorized zoom, focus and shutters?

Thanks

-Rob

I don;t know what you mean about motorised shutters. As far as I'm aware the HC5000 doesn't have anything like that. You may be getting confused either with electronic blanking or the internal iris. As such it will still project some light outside the screen area (whatever light the projector produces when it tries to project "black"). This isn't a problem if you use a black surround for your screen.

[RobL]

See page EN-28 in http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/files...nual_HC5000.pdf for details of the shutters. My interpretation is that this will give true black borders. (but would appreciate confirmation from a HC5000 owner).

Given my use of standard def DVD and the fact that BlueRay and HD-DVD will not make use of all 1080 lines in 2.35 material, I don't think the resolution is an issue, but point taken about the loss of brightness. Does any one have any idea how much it will drop. Is it purely a percentage of how much it is cropped or does some of the cropped light bounce around inside and still make it out of the projector (I hope this makes sense).

-Rob

[CAVX]

See page EN-28 in http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/files...nual_HC5000.pdf for details of the shutters. My interpretation is that this will give true black borders. (but would appreciate confirmation from a HC5000 owner).

Given my use of standard def DVD and the fact that BlueRay and HD-DVD will not make use of all 1080 lines in 2.35 material, I don't think the resolution is an issue, but point taken about the loss of brightness. Does any one have any idea how much it will drop. Is it purely a percentage of how much it is cropped or does some of the cropped light bounce around inside and still make it out of the projector (I hope this makes sense).

-Rob

It is said that if you were to compare a zoomed image against that of a CIH system (using a lens) and both images are the same size, that the true CIH will be brighter.

If this is true or not is still up for debate as by default, you are still projecting through glass, and no lens is 100% transparent. However, when comparing the two images, the CIH will be more dense (the pixels are smaller) as it uses the full 1920 x 1080 pixels to create the image instead of 1920 x 810...

Mark

[The_Preacher1973]

See page EN-28 in http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/files...nual_HC5000.pdf for details of the shutters. My interpretation is that this will give true black borders. (but would appreciate confirmation from a HC5000 owner).

-Rob

That's just electronic blanking. It just creates black pixels to block noise on the edge of some signals. It's not a mechcanical setup. It won't have any effect on the light output of "black" bars on a 2.35:1 movie.

[RobL]

That's just electronic blanking. It just creates black pixels to block noise on the edge of some signals. It's not a mechcanical setup. It won't have any effect on the light output of "black" bars on a 2.35:1 movie.

ok, thanks for the clarification. The manual made it sound mechanical.

Now, if I believe the marketing hype at http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/PRODU...PROJ/HC5000.htm, C2FINE results in "When voltage is not being applied, the liquid crystal molecules are aligned vertically against the glass substrate, so there is no leakage of light as with conventional LCD systems, ensuring a deeper reproduction of black."

So my question to the HC5000 owners out there is how much light leakage is there in the black bars? I guess if I paint the wall around the screen a dark matte colour, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

Thanks for everyones input in the thread so far.

-Rob

[norpus]

ok, thanks for the clarification. The manual made it sound mechanical.

Now, if I believe the marketing hype at http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/PRODU...PROJ/HC5000.htm, C2FINE results in "When voltage is not being applied, the liquid crystal molecules are aligned vertically against the glass substrate, so there is no leakage of light as with conventional LCD systems, ensuring a deeper reproduction of black."

So my question to the HC5000 owners out there is how much light leakage is there in the black bars? I guess if I paint the wall around the screen a dark matte colour, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

Thanks for everyones input in the thread so far.

-Rob

Rather than use paint, which will reflect some no matter what colour/matt sheen, I recommend best surround to be velvet or black velour at least. Very absorbent and scatters anything else - no reflection.

JohnA did this (altho I saw it first at Harrys (SGR) )

[DuyKha]

Rather than use paint, which will reflect some no matter what colour/matt sheen, I recommend best surround to be velvet or black velour at least. Very absorbent and scatters anything else - no reflection.

JohnA did this (altho I saw it first at Harrys (SGR) )

I definately recommend black velvet. Add the extra dollars and go valentino (sp?) velvet - i just made some masking panels for 16:9 material for my scope screen. I'm thinking of pinning some onto one of my side walls (and maybe even a section of the ceiling ). I envy all you guys out there with bat caves!

[Guest JohnA]

the velvet does the job beautifully on top and bottom of screen, then vlevet cutains on the side to mask for when watching 16:9 material

I will however be purchasing the new lens that mark has made

can i see another group buy happening for the mark 11 lens?

[CAVX]

can i see another group buy happening for the mark 11 lens?

Yes you can

Mark

[Guest JohnA]

wooohoooooooooo

let me know when its hapening please Mark

[Curious]

Yes you can

Mark

Howdy Mark,

I might be interested in the group buy too!

I am in the middle of preparing my PE8720 for mounting and it occurred to me that the mounting position might change if I go CIH, is that possible?

The BenQ is at maximum distance from the screen (approx 4 metres) and is only able to fill about 100 inchs of a 110" screen, this is with aperture at max opening (I think).

What will CIH do to the PJ position (if anything) and/or the zoom i'd need?

Thanks for any advice you can give.

Cheers,

Curious

[Johnson4]

Without a lens, you're not taking advantage of the full projector panel in terms of resolution and brightness. Even though the source may not be recorded in the full 1080 lines, you'll still get a better picture because the full projector panel is being used.

I'm still trying to come to terms with this... so there's no projector that can (natively) display 2.35:1 without losing precious pixels? That seems like a ridiculous oversight...

I'm trying to design our HT room with a 2.35:1 screen, displaying movies as such, with 1.85:1 and smaller widths just having black bars on the sides (ie: constant height for all types of movies/TV). Is this harder than it sounds?

[Guest JohnA]

yep its a pain Johnson4

maybe one day projectors will be able to do it all.

Do get a scope screen, it is unbelievable

the only down side is your 16:9 movies are small.

I was thinking of using 2 screens

my fixed scope and a motorised 16:9 screen for the movies that aren't 2.35:1

[Taki]

The beauty of the scope screen is the height always stays the same. Your eyes can handle more information left and right than up and down. Thats why a scope screen can be so wide without it feeling too big to the eyes.

It's best to pick screen size on height not width. As a rule of thumb for seating distance, for a 720p projector around 3-3.5x screen height, 1080p projector 2-3x

[yamapro]

Agree it's all a bit painfull but we have to prioritise.

My opinion is that 'scope' movies should be the biggest and most spectacular, the pretty much decided it for me to go CIH. 2.37 ends up the biggest and boldest, with 16:9 next down losing some width but still a nice big watchable picture and 4:3 bringing up the rear as least important and therfore smallest.

At the moment the 'Scopers among us are a tiny little minority group but it seems all who see a CIH set-up marvel and rejoice and then get added to the collective. Several of my friends for example are excited just at the Idea of CIH (once i explained it for them with the use of many diagrams (working with gyprock makes that bit sooo easy )) they haven't even seen results yet. Once i have opening night at my place with my new scope set-up i'm certain champagne will fall from the heavens (Hmm that gives me an idea for another topic)...

[CAVX]

Howdy Mark,

I might be interested in the group buy too!

I am in the middle of preparing my PE8720 for mounting and it occurred to me that the mounting position might change if I go CIH, is that possible?

The BenQ is at maximum distance from the screen (approx 4 metres) and is only able to fill about 100 inchs of a 110" screen, this is with aperture at max opening (I think).

What will CIH do to the PJ position (if anything) and/or the zoom i'd need?

Thanks for any advice you can give.

Cheers,

Curious

Hi Curious,

When you add a HE lens like the "Aussiemorphic Lens", your mounting height, focus and projection throw distance should not change. Basically the HE lens expands the 16:9 beam by 33% turning the 1.78:1 beam into a 2.37:1 beam. The only real consideration is the size and weight of the lens that will sit in the light path when you mount the projector and lens.

For a 4m throw, ideally your 2.37:1 screen will be 1080mm x 2560mm. This may seem a bit smaller than what your used to, so if you like, you can simply work off the max image height you currently have now. You have stated that your not able to fill the full 110" 16:9 screen, so I would suggest that you take the image height and times that by 2.37 to work out your new screen width. That way you will fill your Scope screen, and still have the same size 16:9 image your currently enjoying. It is a bit large, but you might actually enjoy that immersive experience...

I'm still trying to come to terms with this... so there's no projector that can (natively) display 2.35:1 without losing precious pixels? That seems like a ridiculous oversight...

I'm trying to design our HT room with a 2.35:1 screen, displaying movies as such, with 1.85:1 and smaller widths just having black bars on the sides (ie: constant height for all types of movies/TV). Is this harder than it sounds?

Not really. The idea of costant height is exactly as you understand it - all images at the same height regardless of width (which will vary for differnt ARs).

By using an anamorphic lens, we can use the full 16:9 panel to display both 1.78:1 (lens removed) and 2.37:1 (lens in place). The key will be "scaling" the image. Have a look at the CIH Explained link in my signature...

yep its a pain Johnson4

maybe one day projectors will be able to do it all.

Do get a scope screen, it is unbelievable

the only down side is your 16:9 movies are small.

I was thinking of using 2 screens

my fixed scope and a motorised 16:9 screen for the movies that aren't 2.35:1

Having a native "scope" chip is talked about quite often. Whilst it seems novel to have such a device (certainly quick and easy), there comes a point to which the smaller ARs would actually suffer. The other question for debate is hust how wide would we need to go. With a 33% stretch anamorphic lens in place, the beam of light is expanded from 1.78:1 to 2.37:1. Is that really wide enough if your designing a purpose built chip?

I have designed several rooms over the past few years. I used to make the common mistke and work off the image width. Instead, I have found that it is best to work off the image height. As it turns out, we are more sensitive to the vertical height of the image than we are to the horizontal width, so once you have found that "ideal" height, the width will seem natural regardless of the AR. In other words, one you have found the image height you happy with, even 1.33:1 is very watchable...

The beauty of the scope screen is the height always stays the same. Your eyes can handle more information left and right than up and down. Thats why a scope screen can be so wide without it feeling too big to the eyes.

It's best to pick screen size on height not width. As a rule of thumb for seating distance, for a 720p projector around 3-3.5x screen height, 1080p projector 2-3x

The WizKid speaks the thruth

Agree it's all a bit painfull but we have to prioritise.

My opinion is that 'scope' movies should be the biggest and most spectacular, the pretty much decided it for me to go CIH. 2.37 ends up the biggest and boldest, with 16:9 next down losing some width but still a nice big watchable picture and 4:3 bringing up the rear as least important and therfore smallest.

At the moment the 'Scopers among us are a tiny little minority group but it seems all who see a CIH set-up marvel and rejoice and then get added to the collective. Several of my friends for example are excited just at the Idea of CIH (once i explained it for them with the use of many diagrams (working with gyprock makes that bit sooo easy biggrin.gif)) they haven't even seen results yet. Once i have opening night at my place with my new scope set-up i'm certain champagne will fall from the heavens biggrin.gif (Hmm that gives me an idea for another topic)...

Well said and yes CIH is still a niche today, but is becoming more and more popular. Again, your 16:9 image does not have to suffer. If you work off the image height, it will simply be as impressive as it was. The difference is of course the films that are of a wider AR. These will now be presented the way they were meant to be seen...

Mark

[Taki]

Scope movies should be spectacular and really bring back the feeling of going to the cinema for the first time again.

Nothing spells cinematic more than having the curtains on 16x9 screen open up to reveal a wide scope screen. It's really engaging watching movies this way.

When the director films a scope movie, he wants to convey the story not on small letterboxed image but on a wide scope canvas that really involves the viewer.

[CAVX]

Scope movies should be spectacular and really bring back the feeling of going to the cinema for the first time again.

Nothing spells cinematic more than having the curtains on 16x9 screen open up to reveal a wide scope screen. It's really engaging watching movies this way.

When the director films a scope movie, he wants to convey the story not on small letterboxed image but on a wide scope canvas that really involves the viewer.

Well said

Mark

[norpus]

Howdy Mark,

I might be interested in the group buy too!

I am in the middle of preparing my PE8720 for mounting and it occurred to me that the mounting position might change if I go CIH, is that possible?

The BenQ is at maximum distance from the screen (approx 4 metres) and is only able to fill about 100 inchs of a 110" screen, this is with aperture at max opening (I think).

What will CIH do to the PJ position (if anything) and/or the zoom i'd need?

Thanks for any advice you can give.

Cheers,

Curious

Curious, you are in perfect position I think

My8720 was too far back at 5.8mtrs and couldn't zoom out enough for 108"

At 4mtrs, it should be ideal - remember the picture width will increase by 1.33X

he 8720 is all setup for this at the touch of the remote

[Curious]

Hi Curious,

When you add a HE lens like the "Aussiemorphic Lens", your mounting height, focus and projection throw distance should not change. Basically the HE lens expands the 16:9 beam by 33% turning the 1.78:1 beam into a 2.37:1 beam. The only real consideration is the size and weight of the lens that will sit in the light path when you mount the projector and lens.

For a 4m throw, ideally your 2.37:1 screen will be 1080mm x 2560mm. This may seem a bit smaller than what your used to, so if you like, you can simply work off the max image height you currently have now. You have stated that your not able to fill the full 110" 16:9 screen, so I would suggest that you take the image height and times that by 2.37 to work out your new screen width. That way you will fill your Scope screen, and still have the same size 16:9 image your currently enjoying. It is a bit large, but you might actually enjoy that immersive experience...

Thanks Mark I think I am slowly getting the picture (pun intended), I appreciate the laymans language I'm not so good with the high tech stuff

A couple of questions to cement in my thick head what you are patiently trying to impart:

1. If I work on my current image height (125cm) then I end up with 296cm width as CIH, am I using the full pixel structure available to achieve this? (bit confused about the reference to 1080x2560 being the 'ideal' screen)

2. Keeping the 16:9 image height (125cm) to achieve CIH, does that mean when I take the lens away I need to adjust the picture via the remote so it isn't distorted?

Cheers,

Curious

[Curious]

Curious, you are in perfect position I think

My8720 was too far back at 5.8mtrs and couldn't zoom out enough for 108"

At 4mtrs, it should be ideal - remember the picture width will increase by 1.33X

he 8720 is all setup for this at the touch of the remote

Thanks Norpus,

I am getting that good feeling that tells me it may work out after all, my problem is I tend to get things better when I can visualise them rather than discuss them technically (but the Forum is helping me to learn this 'new' skill )

If you have a few minutes next Friday at E-home, i would like to ask a few more questions

Cheers,

Curious

[CAVX]

Thanks Mark I think I am slowly getting the picture (pun intended), I appreciate the laymans language I'm not so good with the high tech stuff

A couple of questions to cement in my thick head what you are patiently trying to impart:

1. If I work on my current image height (125cm) then I end up with 296cm width as CIH, am I using the full pixel structure available to achieve this? (bit confused about the reference to 1080x2560 being the 'ideal' screen)

Basically veiwing angles are worked for film, then adopted to the home. For many years THX's 36 degrees was the choice for image width. However, that 36 degrees or 1.54 times the image width was meant for 2.39:1 CinemaScope, not HDTV's 1.78:1. So what we ended up with in the home is screen and image heights that were too tall fof the given seating distance. The ideal screen height can be worked out from two ways - Screen Width x 1.54 (but this only works for Scope) or screen height x 3.68. Interestingly enough, the distance from a given Scope screen x 1.54 also equals the same distance of the screen height x 3.68, where both give you the same 36 degree position.

Therefore if we used 3.68 time the screen height, we find our ideal veiwing angle regardless of the AR.

I found the 1080 x 2560 by taking the 4m throw (assuming the projector is at the back of the room) and dividing that by 3.68 to get the height, then times that by 2.37 to get the width. In that case, you would be closer than 36 degrees, and some people actually prefer this...

2. Keeping the 16:9 image height (125cm) to achieve CIH, does that mean when I take the lens away I need to adjust the picture via the remote so it isn't distorted?

Cheers,

Curious

No. With a CIH system employing a HE lens, your image height will not change, neither will the focus. When you remove the lens for 1.78:1 or 1.33:1, you only need to change the AR on the projector or your images will be "tall and thin".

So if you are comfortable with the 1250mm high image, then your ARs would be as follows -

1.33:1 - 1663 x 1250

1.78:1 - 2225 x 1250

2.37:1 - 2963 x 1250 (That is a big screen)

NB all numbers have been rounded up to the next full mm...

In accordance to the THX 36 degree rule, you would therefore have to sit 4600mm from the screen, but if I have understood your post correctly, you don't have that distance, so will have to sit closer, or reduce the image size. Given that most people DO NOT wish to decrease their image size, you may just want to have a larger vewing experince, and may actaully find it quite immersive and with a 720 projector, you should not see pixel structure.

Remember the THX 36 degree rule is a guide line for the "preferred" viewing angle. It is not law to have such an angle...

Mark