GETREAL Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 On 20/04/2012 at 1:00 PM, seatonrocks said: No mate, he displays 16:9 as per normal and prefers his scope material the same width with black bars top and bottom. The opposite of an authentic cinema, but each to their own. Aaah gotchya, yep, the old scope vs 16:9 argument will outlast civilization..... I've made up my mind on the situation....
Owen Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 People can buy whatever screen size and shape they like, it makes no difference to me, but since all the highest visual quality Bluray source is 16:9 and the projector natively displays 16:9 why cripple the enjoyment of such source by projecting it smaller? Your scope image is not going to be compromised as it will be the same size as you planed and the extra height almost comes for free. I wonder how many people go to an IMAX theatre and think, gee I wish they would project the IMAX content the same height as normal scope content.
minty Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 (edited) On 20/04/2012 at 5:10 PM, Owen said: People can buy whatever screen size and shape they like, it makes no difference to me, but since all the highest visual quality Bluray source is 16:9 and the projector natively displays 16:9 why cripple the enjoyment of such source by projecting it smaller? Your scope image is not going to be compromised as it will be the same size as you planed and the extra height almost comes for free. I wonder how many people go to an IMAX theatre and think, gee I wish they would project the IMAX content the same height as normal scope content. Owen, you question why spoil 16:9 by projecting it smaller, yet that is exactly what you do when projecting scope. It's a winless argument either way. You and others judge by width, myself and others judge by height. To each his own. Why do you feel the need to have this same conversation over and over? Whichever method is used, one AR will be larger than the other. Edited April 20, 2012 by seatonrocks
bbar Posted April 20, 2012 Posted April 20, 2012 On 20/04/2012 at 8:34 PM, seatonrocks said: Owen, you question why spoil 16:9 by projecting it smaller, yet that is exactly what you do when projecting scope. It's a winless argument either way. You and others judge by width, myself and others judge by height. To each his own. Why do you feel the need to have this same conversation over and over? Whichever method is used, one AR will be larger than the other. It fills a void
Owen Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 On 20/04/2012 at 8:34 PM, seatonrocks said: Owen, you question why spoil 16:9 by projecting it smaller, yet that is exactly what you do when projecting scope. It's a winless argument either way. You and others judge by width, myself and others judge by height. To each his own. Why do you feel the need to have this same conversation over and over? Whichever method is used, one AR will be larger than the other. You missed the point and I just dont understand why some people get so worked over this subject. When purchasing a new screen it seems wise to buy one that is both wide enough and tall enough to project whatever is desire on it both now and in the future, you dont have to use all the width or all the height all the time, its optional and content dependant. If either dimension is restricted there will be situations where people might wish that it wasn't, thats all I'm saying. Why thats is a such a controversial concept is hard to comprehend, know one is getting their arm twisted to use it, its just a suggestion thats some my find worthy of consideration.
GETREAL Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 OK, I have been doing a bit more thinking and research on screen size, and after going to big picture people for some demos and taking measurements of seating distance from screen I decided I woiuld have to be happy with the 16:9 picture size first as I will be watching quite a bit of tv/foxtel and also a little gaming. From there the scope size will (once zoomed) be a bonus. So looking at a 110" 16:9 image from 3.4m I was quite satisfied and impressed, especially once seeing a 100" 16:9 image from the same distance. So that will equate to around a 140" scope image. Unfortunately with my room going to be 4.0m wide I will run into problems in going any bigger, as I'm not going AT and need room for speakers either side of the screen. A 140" scope screen is around 3.4m wide, and allowing for one of Chris' (Prior) masking system brings it down to around 200mm either side of the screen. Since I will be also running height speakers I don't think there will be room for a 150" scope screen. Anyway I'm assuming 140" scope will give me the WOW factor I'm after, and for those who can't handle the size can sit in the back row, or if need be can watch a scope movie on the 110" masked screen....
betty boop Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 yeah that'll be plenty big and be pretty pleased for both scope and 16:9 done well to check out for your self to decide what feels best and sits right. re masking the 16:9 screen for scope if something want to do that its really easy with many diy means that have seen people do look forward to seeing the room come together !
GETREAL Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 [quote name=' timestamp='1334996727' post='1798276] yeah that'll be plenty big and be pretty pleased for both scope and 16:9 done well to check out for your self to decide what feels best and sits right. re masking the 16:9 screen for scope if something want to do that its really easy with many diy means that have seen people do look forward to seeing the room come together ! There is so much you can read on the Internet and calculate on paper, but nothing is more accurate to actually experiencing it in a room and seeing with your own eyes what you prefer. I'd highly recommend it to anyone who is contemplating what size screen to choose. Take a tape measure to a home theatre store and see what you like. Must say the big picture people were very accommodating and didn't seem phased in me spending an hour in one of the rooms taking measurements and watching material. They weren't hanging over my shoulder giving you that look as if to say OK I've answered your questions now start spending some money. I was left alone and didn't feel pressured at all. Al, it will be around Christmas time when the house should be finished, so the HT room shouldn't be too far behind, after spending a couple of hours in a store HT yesterday I don't know how I'm going to last another 8 months!!!!! Have collected quite a bit of gear already, but going to leave projector and AVR/pre/pro selection last, as the technology is changing so frequently.... Sorry to all for hijacking the thread, should have started my own build thread with my rambling!!!!
betty boop Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 On 21/04/2012 at 10:55 PM, GETREAL95 said: There is so much you can read on the Internet and calculate on paper, but nothing is more accurate to actually experiencing it in a room and seeing with your own eyes what you prefer. I'd highly recommend it to anyone who is contemplating what size screen to choose. Take a tape measure to a home theatre store and see what you like. Must say the big picture people were very accommodating and didn't seem phased in me spending an hour in one of the rooms taking measurements and watching material. They weren't hanging over my shoulder giving you that look as if to say OK I've answered your questions now start spending some money. I was left alone and didn't feel pressured at all. ~ absolutely agree, while theres all sorts of calculators they'll only ever give you some clues and nothing beats actually seeing, experiencing and deciding for yourself. yes some good specialist stores out there for sure, great to see and am sure they see it as good will invested, which no doubt come back one day in some form On 21/04/2012 at 10:55 PM, GETREAL95 said: ~ Al, it will be around Christmas time when the house should be finished, so the HT room shouldn't be too far behind, after spending a couple of hours in a store HT yesterday I don't know how I'm going to last another 8 months!!!!! Have collected quite a bit of gear already, but going to leave projector and AVR/pre/pro selection last, as the technology is changing so frequently.... Sorry to all for hijacking the thread, should have started my own build thread with my rambling!!!! you'll be amazed how quick that will come around. took me ages to get my own pj setup up and going. good thinking I reckon in leaving avr and pj purchase last. pjs particularly there are better and better models coming out all the time. and their price only seems to drop making them more affordable. current technology pjs regardless of brand also unfortunately have to say are a bit flaky so best to buy when need to use it. that way any issues can just get it swapped out or sorted out as soon after purchase with DOA warranties. dont see this screen discussion as off topic. but do start a construction thread I'd suggest in the construction sub forum, am sure many be very keen to follow your progress, good luck with things
oztheatre Posted April 22, 2012 Posted April 22, 2012 The main problem with a massive 16:9 screen trying to get the extra wide image for cinemascope movies is TV, Austar, foxtel, games, dvd and anything not as clean as blu ray can and often does look hideous. If I'm watching TV or cable TV or anything non blu ray I want it to look watchable, not full of compression artifacts and associated nasties when blown up to imax size. It's only 235 and 240 blockbuster scope films that are used to fill a scope screen, not the cricket or mash or the news. If I blew up my scope screen and turned it into a taller 16:9 screen, it would have to be 147 inch 16:9 screen. And from 3.5 metres away, trust me, it looks awful when you're trying to watch anything but blu ray. You have to move further back to resolve the image, thus defeating the purpose completely. You have to become a row jumper of sorts to make a same width large 16:9 screen work. Getting the right native image size to begin with is the key - taking into account everything you will watch, not just blu ray. then going wider for scope movies only is an added bonus - because most of those films will be watched on BLU RAY!! I just dont see the point in watching blockbuster movies, as presented to us in the cinemas in 21:9, in the same width as 16:9 with a 25% reduction in height (that's the same surface area as a 4:3 film!). Some have no other option but to go 16:9 because of room constraints and that's fine. Scope will always be a great option for those who want to go down that path. Good to see the opinions flowing freely on this delicate topic once again
GETREAL Posted April 22, 2012 Posted April 22, 2012 Well said Richard, that's why as I specified in my previous post I was looking at getting the right 16:9 size for the seating distance, and the extra real estate of the scope image is a bonus for movies (obviously shot in 235:1). Yesterday when I was at the big picture people I checked out a 135" 16:9 screen in one of the rooms sitting at 3.5m away watching the footy in HD (720p) I found that after a couple of minutes it became unbearable, not only was the picture quality bad but trying to keep up with the fast movements I found quite uncomfortable. Just way to big for that seating distance. I got the guy to put on a bluray (Book of Eli) on the same screen and being a 235:1 movie it worked out to around a 140" scope image. Not only was it heaps better in picture quality, it wasn't as fatiguing at 3.5m from the screen. Obviously this is my preference, others may have different opinions.....
Owen Posted April 22, 2012 Posted April 22, 2012 Whatever size screen or aspect ratio you buy you don't have to use it all for all content. When displaying low quality SD you simply grab the projectors remote and zoom out to get an appropriate size image, and when displaying the highest quality 16:9 Bluray content you can zoom in to get all the impact the video quality allows. A single screen size or aspect ratio is always going to be a compromise unless it is large enough both horizontally and vertically to accommodate anything you are likely to display on it. A large screen can be made small at the touch of a button but all you can do with a screen that is too small for the content is replace it.
oztheatre Posted April 22, 2012 Posted April 22, 2012 On 22/04/2012 at 1:03 PM, Owen said: Whatever size screen or aspect ratio you buy you don't have to use it all for all content. When displaying low quality SD you simply grab the projectors remote and zoom out to get an appropriate size image, and when displaying the highest quality 16:9 Bluray content you can zoom in to get all the impact the video quality allows. A single screen size or aspect ratio is always going to be a compromise unless it is large enough both horizontally and vertically to accommodate anything you are likely to display on it. A large screen can be made small at the touch of a button but all you can do with a screen that is too small for the content is replace it. In your opinion. In my opinion, zooming the image in and out and taking the edge of the image off the velvet is home theatre blasphemy.
BladeRnR Posted April 22, 2012 Posted April 22, 2012 On 22/04/2012 at 11:49 AM, GETREAL95 said: Well said Richard, that's why as I specified in my previous post I was looking at getting the right 16:9 size for the seating distance, and the extra real estate of the scope image is a bonus for movies (obviously shot in 235:1). Yesterday when I was at the big picture people I checked out a 135" 16:9 screen in one of the rooms sitting at 3.5m away watching the footy in HD (720p) I found that after a couple of minutes it became unbearable, not only was the picture quality bad but trying to keep up with the fast movements I found quite uncomfortable. Just way to big for that seating distance. I got the guy to put on a bluray (Book of Eli) on the same screen and being a 235:1 movie it worked out to around a 140" scope image. Not only was it heaps better in picture quality, it wasn't as fatiguing at 3.5m from the screen. Obviously this is my preference, others may have different opinions..... Jack you've experienced Scope at my place with a seating position of around 4 meters from the screen. I still remember the first thing you said "That is just amazing - it's just like the movies". You were also amazed at the PQ. I remember you saying you would not settle for anything less now that you'd experienced it. I've had over 40 people experience my humble HT since then and 33 of them have bought Scope screens / setups (Some zoom due to cost, some bought a Lens). Not once have I heard a visitor complain about lack of picture quality, sharpness, contrast or any other video issue. I ask everyone to be honest and not to hold back as most who visit are hardcore enthusiasts. I also have white walls... That is what Scope @ home represents. A facsimile of a commercial movie experience in a home environment. Scope is and always has been a more immersive experience (Until IMAX came along but that is quite unique and is difficult to reproduce in a home environment - note I did say "difficult" not "Impossible") for me. It's why studios introduced Cinescope in the first place. It was something unique in a time the public could not experience it any other way. It also gave (gives) Directors flexible & artistic license to create their vision - particularly "epic" films such as "Lawrence Of Arabia" and "Star Wars" (for example). Star Wars @ 16:9 anyone? - I don't think so... All my opinion of course. As most have said here - try it for yourself. Specifications & speculation only get you so far. Blade
minty Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 On 22/04/2012 at 11:04 PM, BladeRnR said: Jack you've experienced Scope at my place with a seating position of around 4 meters from the screen. I still remember the first thing you said "That is just amazing - it's just like the movies". You were also amazed at the PQ. I remember you saying you would not settle for anything less now that you'd experienced it. I've had over 40 people experience my humble HT since then and 33 of them have bought Scope screens / setups (Some zoom due to cost, some bought a Lens). Not once have I heard a visitor complain about lack of picture quality, sharpness, contrast or any other video issue. I ask everyone to be honest and not to hold back as most who visit are hardcore enthusiasts. I also have white walls... That is what Scope @ home represents. A facsimile of a commercial movie experience in a home environment. Scope is and always has been a more immersive experience (Until IMAX came along but that is quite unique and is difficult to reproduce in a home environment - note I did say "difficult" not "Impossible") for me. It's why studios introduced Cinescope in the first place. It was something unique in a time the public could not experience it any other way. It also gave (gives) Directors flexible & artistic license to create their vision - particularly "epic" films such as "Lawrence Of Arabia" and "Star Wars" (for example). Star Wars @ 16:9 anyone? - I don't think so... All my opinion of course. As most have said here - try it for yourself. Specifications & speculation only get you so far. Blade Mate everything you say is spot on, except for one glaringly obvious untruth...........and that is your HT is far, far from being humble. It is bloody amazing as is your whole house and something you should be extremely proud of.
Owen Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 On 22/04/2012 at 10:12 PM, oztheatre said: In your opinion. In my opinion, zooming the image in and out and taking the edge of the image off the velvet is home theatre blasphemy. For those who find it a problem masking is the answer. How do you deal with content that does not fit your screen now?
BladeRnR Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 (edited) On 23/04/2012 at 12:16 AM, seatonrocks said: Mate everything you say is spot on, except for one glaringly obvious untruth...........and that is your HT is far, far from being humble. It is bloody amazing as is your whole house and something you should be extremely proud of. Niki still talks about "The time John went white and almost crippled himself holding onto his legs so tight" Thanks mate - appreciate the words. We both know Statistics/Specifications are one thing - it's the experience that is No #1. Blade Edited April 23, 2012 by BladeRnR
Owen Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 Here is a relatively simple test people can perform to work out whats best for them. Find a showroom that has a 16:9 screen that is at least as wide as you are contemplating for scope, a fellow forum members screen would be another option of a white wall as a fall back solution. Then display some high quality Bluray scope content at the viewing distance you will use at home and adjust the picture size to what you find most pleasing. This could take a while and require variety of scope content to be displayed so don't rush. Once you have established the image width you like for scope display some high quality Bluray 16:9 content without adjusting the projector, the image will be the same width as scope but about 30% taller and image quality should be at least as good if not better. View for some time, preferably with a variety of good 16:9 Bluray content to get used to the size and the look. Once you have done that play the same 16:9 content again, but this time with the image zoomed down so that it is the same height as the scope image, or about 30% narrower than scope and see how you like it. If you prefer the high quality 16:9 displayed smaller (same height as scope) a scope screen is the right choice for you, however if you preferred the 16:9 content display the same width as scope a 16:9 screen is the obvious choice.
Nevyn72 Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 I think people worry far too much about black bars, whether they be on the sides or on the top & bottom.......
oztheatre Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 On 23/04/2012 at 2:05 AM, Owen said: Here is a relatively simple test people can perform to work out whats best for them. Find a showroom that has a 16:9 screen that is at least as wide as you are contemplating for scope, a fellow forum members screen would be another option of a white wall as a fall back solution. Then display some high quality Bluray scope content at the viewing distance you will use at home and adjust the picture size to what you find most pleasing. This could take a while and require variety of scope content to be displayed so don't rush. Once you have established the image width you like for scope display some high quality Bluray 16:9 content without adjusting the projector, the image will be the same width as scope but about 30% taller and image quality should be at least as good if not better. View for some time, preferably with a variety of good 16:9 Bluray content to get used to the size and the look. Once you have done that play the same 16:9 content again, but this time with the image zoomed down so that it is the same height as the scope image, or about 30% narrower than scope and see how you like it. If you prefer the high quality 16:9 displayed smaller (same height as scope) a scope screen is the right choice for you, however if you preferred the 16:9 content display the same width as scope a 16:9 screen is the obvious choice. Yeah but you're completely forgetting about the other 16:9 content being TV, much of which is 576i. This blown up to the same width as blu ray scope is and can be a problem. Then again each to their own. To put it another way. Watch some 16:9 content including blu ray and TV to settle on your 16:9 image height and then spoil yourself and view some 235 movies in ultra widescreen and see which you prefer.
oztheatre Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 On 23/04/2012 at 1:04 AM, Owen said: For those who find it a problem masking is the answer. How do you deal with content that does not fit your screen now? I prefer all my images to be of the same height, not chopped and changed all over the place. I can't do much about bare material left and right on my scope screen just now, but prior's masking system is going into my showroom soonish. problem solved.
betty boop Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 the thing is there are plenty on here enjoying both 16:9 and scope screens. and watching all sorts of material on them. quite frankly this continuous barage that seems to go on forcing one format of screen down peoples throat is all a bit stupid. we've all heard the same tired old arguments from both sides over and over and over and over and over.... yawn.... fair enough where someone makes a post in a thread on their opinion and then moves on, but I dont quite frankly see the need of those constant regurgitations ...especially where its quite obvious the OP pages ago actually has experimented for himself with projecting on a wall to decide what is best for his needs...
Nevyn72 Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 I think we need to find a compromise and I think I have the solution! I'd like to propose a new format that shall be referred to as CIA (constant image area). What you will have is a screen that is neither 16:9 or 21:9 but something in between. Such a screen will, with the use of a 'zoom mode' on the PJ, present an image with exactly the same surface area for both 16:9 & 21:9 content. Given that many PJs these days have lens memory this should not be an issue. Thus it doesn't matter what material you are watching, it will be exactly the same size! It's perfect! There's no winner in terms of who's screen gets the bigger image for what type of content, the area is the same irrespective. There's no arguement over black bars either, it doesn't matter what content you watch they'll always be there, somewhere on the screen, so no-one misses out! CIA is the answer, no more forum wars! I wonder if I'll get the Nobel peace prize for this?
betty boop Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 oh no then we'll just have the 'CIA' types on here stuffing that down our throats as well
Owen Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 (edited) On 23/04/2012 at 9:20 AM, ... said: I think people worry far too much about black bars, whether they be on the sides or on the top & bottom....... Agreed, with a high contrast projector black bars are a non issue IMHO. No matter what aspect ratio screen you choose there will always be black bars on some content. If its a problem mask. My message is simple, a 16:9 screen gives you the flexibility to display both scope and 16:9 content at its best without compromising either, a scope screen does not. Its nothing to do with which aspect ratio is "better", why not enjoy both the the max? CIA wont work because source quality varies too much. Who wants to view low quality SD at the same size as best quality Bluray? Edited April 23, 2012 by Owen
Recommended Posts