ArthurDent Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 (edited) For anybody interested in such things, I've updated my "Ken's easy to use screen calculator" page. http://winebase.com.au/audio/avscrnm.htm Comments, corrections and additions welcome. Edited May 8, 2008 by Ken Tripp
Riv39 Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 For anybody interested in such things, I've updated my "Ken's easy to use screen calculator" page.http://winebase.com.au/audio/avscrnm.htm Comments and corrections welcome. Work proxy filter won't let me visit .......... I'll have to check it out at home
BladeRnR Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 For anybody interested in such things, I've updated my "Ken's easy to use screen calculator" page.http://winebase.com.au/audio/avscrnm.htm Comments, corrections and additions welcome. Ken as a Techo myself I admire the functional simplicity and clear explanation you've provided with your calculator. It's without doubt the easiest Projector Distance / Screen Size Calculator I've yet used and that includes the ones on the 'professional' sites like Canon. And it came at exactly the time I needed it - the planning stages of my HT. Extremely well done Regards Blade
CAVX Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 3 times image height viewing distance (1.78:1 screen) 3798mm3 times image height viewing distance (2.37:1 image) 2848mm Hi Ken, This is good, but from the above, it suggests that it calculates based on Constant Image Width, not Constant Image Height where the 1.78:1 image would be taller for CIW. However, in CIH, both ARs are the same height, therefore seating distances are the same too... Mark
ArthurDent Posted May 9, 2008 Author Posted May 9, 2008 Ken as a Techo myself I admire the functional simplicity and clear explanation you've provided with your calculator. It's without doubt the easiest Projector Distance / Screen Size Calculator I've yet used and that includes the ones on the 'professional' sites like Canon. And it came at exactly the time I needed it - the planning stages of my HT. Extremely well done Regards Blade Thanks Blade.
ArthurDent Posted May 9, 2008 Author Posted May 9, 2008 Hi Ken,This is good, but from the above, it suggests that it calculates based on Constant Image Width, not Constant Image Height where the 1.78:1 image would be taller for CIW. However, in CIH, both ARs are the same height, therefore seating distances are the same too... Mark Yes it's a 1.78:1 screen on which a 2.37:1 image is being shown so the width is the same but the height different and distance calculated from that.
50mxe20 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 What is wrong with my thinking. Why is the distance that one can resolve 1080p less than for 720p. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
Riv39 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Ken Excellent and easy to use, I found the results very useful in planning my setup thanks.
ArthurDent Posted May 9, 2008 Author Posted May 9, 2008 (edited) What is wrong with my thinking.Why is the distance that one can resolve 1080p less than for 720p. Shouldn't it be the other way around? No because with 1080p you have smaller pixels / dot pitch so you need to be closer to the screen in order to see them with the same clarity that you would see the bigger pixels of a 720p display. Edited May 9, 2008 by Ken Tripp
50mxe20 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 No because with 1080p you have smaller pixels / dot pitch so you need to be closer to the screen in order to see them with the same clarity that you would see the bigger pixels of a 720p display.OK
CAVX Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Yes it's a 1.78:1 screen on which a 2.37:1 image is being shown so the width is the same but the height different and distance calculated from that. Thanks Ken, so from a CIH point of view, one simply needs to use the 237 selection... Mark
ArthurDent Posted May 9, 2008 Author Posted May 9, 2008 OK More info and nice graphs on this often referenced article... http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/
BrisVegas1503560691 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 (edited) good article, thanks! I'd wondered myself whether 1080P was worthwhile for 42-50" TV's in normal lounge rooms. I sit 10+ feet back from my TV in the lounge and suspected that I wouldn't need any more than 720P. However I was thinking that for my planned HT room with a 110" screen and viewing distance of about 15 feet, the 1080P resolution would make a noticeable difference. Edited May 9, 2008 by BrisVegas
norpus Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 good article, thanks! I'd wondered myself whether 1080P was worthwhile for 42-50" TV's in normal lounge rooms. I sit 10+ feet back from my TV in the lounge and suspected that I wouldn't need any more than 720P. Yes exactly For my friends HT room, we planned a Pio 508xda instead of the more exxy LX508 - all at 4mtrs, same seating distance as for the projector. The plasma resolution won't make much difference in viewing quality from that 'relatively' long distance. Unfortunately missed out on getting the last of the xdas on runout so the LX was bought ($5K - not a bad price). Theory and practise met reality so cost us $2300 more. Never mind, the LX is a brilliant set
senverse Posted May 11, 2008 Posted May 11, 2008 (edited) Hi all I ordered a 110inch 16x9 screen on friday based on the dimensions of the room and wanting to place my speakers (cube shaped Klipsch THX) on the side of the screen. But I have just done a test run of the projection area and realise that the screen I have ordered is too small. I have just email the maker (OZTheatre) to change it to 125inch. The room is 4 x 6 m and my spot is about 3.9m away from the screen. Is anyone else using this size because I could easily go 130 or 135 inch without hesitation. Getting the screen to fit would be the only thing stopping me. I now plan to place the speakers below the screen and angle them slightly upwards. Anyone using anything bigger then 125 in a 16x9, I would appreciate any info about viewing issues. Edited May 11, 2008 by senverse
Recommended Posts