60" Plasma vs Projector

[Pecker]

This has probably been asked, but the search facility is down at the moment.

You can buy a latest gen Pioneer 60" plasma for not much over £4k.

Now my current PJ screen is around 234cm wide, and I sit maybe 4m away. A 60" plasma has a screen around 140cm wide. I sit in a swivel/recliner for watching films, so I can move that quite a bit (very light). Moving it to c.2m away from the screen would be easy.

What would be the differences be between sitting 2m away from a 60" plasma and 4m away from a projected image twice the width?

Would PQ be better on the plasma than (for example) a £4k projector?

Steve W

[CinemaChap]

from 2m distance, the plasma would look better, with a PJ you may get screen door, and be able to see individual pixel. keep the PJ and sit further back

but at 4m the PJ should look pretty darn good, but we are talking about the latest pioneer here.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by CinemaChap

from 2m distance, the plasma would look better, with a PJ you may get screen door, and be able to see individual pixel. keep the PJ and sit further back

but at 4m the PJ should look pretty darn good, but we are talking about the latest pioneer here.

I'm thinking specifically about plasma at 2m vs PJ at 4m, given that the PJ image is twice as wide - in other words both images effectively being the same size.

Steve W

[eiren]

I've got that 60" plasma and a 4k projector to compare, but I view both from just under 4m.

The PJ is more cinematic, and offers a better film experience... however I really don't like watching general television or playing games on it much... so the plasma excels in this area. Now I've got both, I am not sure I could sacrifice one for the other.

[inzaman]

What about the soundstage, would this be impacted by sitting so close and having the speakers closer together?

[indus]

Originally Posted by Pecker

This has probably been asked, but the search facility is down at the moment.

You can buy a latest gen Pioneer 60" plasma for not much over £4k.

Now my current PJ screen is around 234cm wide, and I sit maybe 4m away. A 60" plasma has a screen around 140cm wide. I sit in a swivel/recliner for watching films, so I can move that quite a bit (very light). Moving it to c.2m away from the screen would be easy.

What would be the differences be between sitting 2m away from a 60" plasma and 4m away from a projected image twice the width?

Would PQ be better on the plasma than (for example) a £4k projector?

Steve W

By that logic why not have a 32" screen and sit 1m away or 15" screen and sit 0.5m away. You'd save loads of money because you could down size your home and av kit

[Gary Lightfoot]

Just to add...

Plasma is considerably brighter (approx 30+ fL) so you may feel it looks a little less 'cinematic' compared to the pj (cinema levels are around 7+ fL) and image noise from non HD material may look less than stellar (setting black levels correctly and using the right gamma would be even more important I would think). ANSI will be a lot higher too since plasmas don't have the same problems with an optical engine that pjs have to deal with, so if the plasma also has better on/off and blacks compared to the pj those aspects will be better on the plasma. Then it comes down to different technological approaches to making the image, i.e scaling & pixel response times etc.

Although your field of view will be the same, you may have the perception of size playing some part so you could feel that you are looking at a smaller image even though it occupies the same space within your field of view. Not having anything visible to reference against may help reduce this.

Audio imaging with near field sounds may make a difference one way or the other too. I've not tried seeing how close you can go before speaker placement makes a noticeably audible difference and is then required to be behind the screen, but with a smaller screen and closer seating distances you may get close enough that the audio is noticeably above or below the image rather than where the action is on the screen. If you can move your chair easily then you can already try this with your existing set up.

With a direct view tv, dark room and decor are far less important than with a pj. You may feel you've lost the 'cinema experience' if the surroundings are brighter and more visible than with a dark room approach and then you may feel that you're just watching a tv a bit closer than normal. YMMV, but if you watch normal tv material from the same distance you may find that movies lose their 'big screen' impact. It's a subjective experience so only you can decide if it's a workable solution for you. Maybe try it with the pj image at that size and see how it looks - it'll be brighter (maybe around 2.5 x) so will go some way to giving you an idea.

[Rich H]

Originally Posted by Pecker

Now my current PJ screen is around 234cm wide, and I sit maybe 4m away. A 60" plasma has a screen around 140cm wide. I sit in a swivel/recliner for watching films, so I can move that quite a bit (very light). Moving it to c.2m away from the screen would be easy.

What would be the differences be between sitting 2m away from a 60" plasma and 4m away from a projected image twice the width?

Would PQ be better on the plasma than (for example) a £4k projector?

Steve W

Steve,

I went through a similar decision. I'd been a flat panel fan (plasma, specifically) for years and had intended to upgrade from my 42" (diag) plasma to 50," and when 50" plasmas became ubiquitous I became smitten with the newer, bigger plasmas. I was dead set on getting the Panasonic 65" plasma which not only produced a gorgeous image, but felt pretty darned cinematic to me, coming as I was from a smaller flat panel.

The "shrinkage" effect comes into play and one does tend to adjust fairly quickly to an image that once seemed big, and which "shrinks" over time so it no longer feels as big (especially as average TV sizes increase). But I felt the Panasonic at 65" diagonal would be big enough to give the more cinematic immersion I craved.

I had planned on putting it in our living room. However the best seating arrangement for the room had the sofa being between 10 and 11 feet away from the screen wall. The ideal seating distance for immersion with the plasma was between 6 and 7 feet away.

I spent plenty of time in a local AV store (from which I planned to buy the plasma) checking out various seating distances. I experimented with cut outs on my wall, moving seating in my living room, you name it. Then I borrowed a friend's projector strictly to create a 65" diag image on my wall to see what it would look like from various seating distances in my room.

Problem is, at one point I made the "mistake" of zooming the image out big. Whoa. It changed the whole equation. Suddenly the sense of cinematic immersion, the sense of image size, was effortless and enveloping! It truly felt different from just "watching a TV." This seemed to feel better, more relaxed and make more sense than shifting around my seating when I wanted to attempt to immerse myself in a smaller plasma image. Ironically, that is how I got hooked on projection more than anything else: strenuously planning on my "dream" plasma eventually brought me to front projection.

The thing is simply sitting closer - a strategy I've used for years with my 42" plasma as well - doesn't do everything you get with a truly bigger image. Yes you can get some more immersion, but it doesn't fool your brain you are therefore looking at "big" objects. Just like I can put on Star Wars on my 24" Mac monitor and move my face close enough to mimic the same angle of view as in a big theater...but doing so doesn't make me feel that suddenly those spaceships on screen are now huge. Rather, my brain registers that I'm simply closer to a small image. (Imagine the havoc with perception if this WEREN'T the case and that your brain determined size simply due to how close you were to an object. You'd be confusing apples with mountains.)

This was the case in every experiment I tried in trying to justify the plasma over the projector. I'd watch Alien on the 65" plasma and thrill at the vividness of the image. But no matter what distance I chose it was still like watching vivid spaceship models traversing the screen. Because...the images, vivid as they were, were "model sized."

But when I projected Alien on my wall at home, it changed the whole experience. Suddenly the spaceships in Alien (and other such movies) DID look huge! The projected image finally brought back the sensation of seeing BIG SHIPS AND BIG ALIEN LANDSCAPES that I hadn't felt in the countless times of watching Alien on smaller displays and hadn't experienced since I saw it in the theater. That was a thrill too hard to pass up, for me. Another nail in the coffin for the smaller flat panel experience.

As to sheer image quality: For years I dismissed front projection mostly on the basis of image quality. It was a combination of the source being limited (DVD) and the quality of digital projection years ago. I was willing to take the more vivid, beautiful image of the plasma over projection. But with the introduction of movies in HD (Blu Ray/HD DVD) and the improvements in projection of the past couple years I found projection finally offered the type of gorgeous image quality I was craving. A win-win situation.

Now, strictly speaking and depending on the criteria, I don't think any projector can still do what a Pioneer Kuro plasma can do, in terms of an effortless presentation of brightness and contrast (even the most heroic viewing environment won't get you the type of ANSI performance the Kuro does in it's sleep).

Although there are ways of getting a plasma-like vividness to projection (e.g. high lumen projector or high gain screen). But if one is looking for the richest possible image I think the Kuro is going to win out.

The question comes down to "how much better" and does the image quality of the Kuro trump the benefits of a much bigger projected image experience.

That's a personal call and for me, no the plasma doesn't win out. I watched the Transformers Blu Ray on the Pioneer Kuro 60" Elite plasma and an hour later watched it on an Epson Powerlight 1080p projector, on a large Stewart Firehawk 2:35:1 screen (using an anamorphic lens). Frankly I was amazed how well the projected image held up in pure image terms of brilliance, contrast, color and sharpness. In fact to my amazement the projected image, despite being massively bigger, looked at least as sharp! There was no contest as to which way I'd prefer to watch movies.

There's also the issue of what I would call "detail" vs "dramatic detail." Both a plasma and a projector may be able to, in technical terms, produce the same amount of image detail. However, sometimes, as the saying goes, "quantity is it's own quality." The sheer size difference of the projected image allows a much easier perception of the image detail, just because it's bigger, easier to see, and shows you things that you wouldn't notice on a smaller screen: details of the surroundings, of actor's expressions in longer shots, extras, production design etc. You are put more in the environment created for you, rather than observing a smaller image, or viewing things through a small window (flat panel). I often find in watching a DVD on my projector, one that I'm extremely familiar with on my flat panel, how much I missed on my flat panel in terms of simply being able to see or notice details in the movie.

So these are my reasons for ultimately choosing the projector over the big plasma. You may be different. You've already got a projector and maybe you are craving something else. But at the very least, don't think that achieving the same viewing angle on a smaller display is equal to the same experience of the same viewing angle on a bigger display. It's not how our brains work.

Although, one other issue I hadn't gotten into is the vividness and realism of an image and it's effect. I found that vividness and realism in an image can, in of itself, "suck you in" to the image. In fact, I remember comparing the opening of Star Wars Revenge Of The Sith on an older Sony LCD projector vs a 55" Fujitsu plasma. The Sony was sort of a dim projector but threw a big image. The plasma was super vivid. In this comparison, the plasma (important: when viewed with the lights out) actually made the motion on screen more visceral. In other words, all the camera spinning and POVs of flying in the ships actual gave me more of a vertigo and realism than the bigger projected image. I've found this also to be the case in comparing projectors and projected image sizes. Sometimes a smaller, denser, punchier looking projected image can have more impact than a larger, dimmer image.

So size doesn't always trump. But as long as a cinematic size is allied to excellent image qualities over all, I would choose the projector over a flat panel for reasons previously given.

Sorry for the length but this issue has been on my mind for all too long in my upgrade path.

Cheers,

Rich

[kbfern]

Rich

What a good read that was,this should be made a sticky for all the folks that ask the same question plasma or pj.You have highlighted the differences very well.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by indus

By that logic why not have a 32" screen and sit 1m away or 15" screen and sit 0.5m away. You'd save loads of money because you could down size your home and av kit

Good point.

I've tried that trick with 32" (haven't we all?) and it just doesn't work, does it. What struck me abot 60" was that it was a traditional display, but approaching PJ screen size.

Hope that makes sense.

Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot

Although your field of view will be the same, you may have the perception of size playing some part so you could feel that you are looking at a smaller image even though it occupies the same space within your field of view. Not having anything visible to reference against may help reduce this.

Aye, as above. The theory is pretty sound, but the question is, where's the cut off between 'big TV' and 'small PJ screen' size? With the 60" Pio being so bloody good I thought it was time to ask the question. Hope that makes sense.

Steve W

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by Rich H

The thing is simply sitting closer - a strategy I've used for years with my 42" plasma as well - doesn't do everything you get with a truly bigger image. Yes you can get some more immersion, but it doesn't fool your brain you are therefore looking at "big" objects. Just like I can put on Star Wars on my 24" Mac monitor and move my face close enough to mimic the same angle of view as in a big theater...but doing so doesn't make me feel that suddenly those spaceships on screen are now huge. Rather, my brain registers that I'm simply closer to a small image.

Superb answer.

So this raises a question - where's the cut-off point? My last screen was about 170-cm wide, which isn't a lot wider than a 60" plasma, but it looked like a screen, not a TV.

70" plasma? 80"?

Steve W

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot

With a direct view tv, dark room and decor are far less important than with a pj. You may feel you've lost the 'cinema experience' if the surroundings are brighter and more visible than with a dark room approach and then you may feel that you're just watching a tv a bit closer than normal.

I think those were exactly the sort of issues I was thinking about myself, too.

Steve W

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by Rich H

Yes you can get some more immersion, but it doesn't fool your brain you are therefore looking at "big" objects. Just like I can put on Star Wars on my 24" Mac monitor and move my face close enough to mimic the same angle of view as in a big theater...but doing so doesn't make me feel that suddenly those spaceships on screen are now huge. Rather, my brain registers that I'm simply closer to a small image. Rich

Great post, and great point.

I've been toying with this issue for a while now, do I upgrade my 50" Pio to a 60" or just keep the Plasma & get a PJ, I think you actually made my mind up.

[Rich H]

Originally Posted by Pecker

Superb answer.

So this raises a question - where's the cut-off point? My last screen was about 170-cm wide, which isn't a lot wider than a 60" plasma, but it looked like a screen, not a TV.

70" plasma? 80"?

Steve W

That's elusive to pin down, I think, due to subjectivity, what each of us prefers and what each of us is used to.

When I first got a 42" plasma it felt huge compared to my 27" tube set it replaced. It felt cinematic. Later, the 65" Panasonic plasma felt huge and cinematic to me. But once I played with projection for a while, even the Panasonic 65" size seemed small.

In fact, I'm used to such a large image that when I go to my local AV store to watch the huge Panasonic 103" plasma - which used to be my dream display - now it seems small and almost TV-like. I used to dream of owning that display, but now I wouldn't choose it over a projector because I can get a much more cinematic-size experience from a projector in my room.

But I think there is for many a point where the image is as big as they are comfortable with, or as big as they'd like. Many with projection set ups seem happy with their image size. I dunno.

I'm hedging my bets and getting the biggest screen I can...just in case. (I'll mask it down to sizes I'm currently comfortable with in the meantime).

But if you are limited in available screen size at home and there is a plasma approaching the size of your projection screen, then the case for the plasma becomes in my mind more compelling. The added vividness of the plasma can win the day. Although, for me, the size difference you talked about in your OP would still lean me toward the projection, because that's a significant size difference.

Gary brought up a very important point too that I forgot to add: One of the things I like about projection is that a strong "plus" comes as the flip side of it's "minus." That is, quality projected images generally entail controlling room light and room decor. This is a hassle of projection over flat panels, but those same demands result in a more cinematic atmosphere: lights out, less distracting room decor, just the movie image floating in the darkness. That in itself is a major influence in the viewing experience. Turning on the lights, as one tends to do with a flat panel, feels more like "watching TV."

I was an early plasma adapter, and I still own my Panasonic ED resolution plasma (talk about being behind the times!). But even after my friends had seen many other plasmas, or bought their own HD plasmas, they continued to freak out about how great movies were at my place on my plasma. Why? Because of the attention I paid to the viewing experience. I always watched with the lights out, even introduced a black backdrop behind the plasma and even masked my plasma for 2:35:1 movies! It made a BIG impact on the way the image looked and how it demanded your attention in a way just watching the TV with the lights on did not.

I remember that after a well-off friend of mine got hooked on plasma after viewing movies at my house, we shopped every high-end plasma we could see, typically bigger, higher resolution etc. Yet after days of doing so he remarked that nothing he'd seen grabbed him like what he experienced on mine. He thought I had a better plasma. No, I offered a better viewing experience.

So the environment and the way you watch is part of the equation of the viewing experience and the impact you'll get.

I'm trying to take everything I've learned about increasing the impact of the viewing experience, and of movie watching, into my own projection set up.

[stuartbrown21]

Originally Posted by Rich H

Steve,

The thing is simply sitting closer - a strategy I've used for years with my 42" plasma as well - doesn't do everything you get with a truly bigger image. Yes you can get some more immersion, but it doesn't fool your brain you are therefore looking at "big" objects. Just like I can put on Star Wars on my 24" Mac monitor and move my face close enough to mimic the same angle of view as in a big theater...but doing so doesn't make me feel that suddenly those spaceships on screen are now huge. Rather, my brain registers that I'm simply closer to a small image. (Imagine the havoc with perception if this WEREN'T the case and that your brain determined size simply due to how close you were to an object. You'd be confusing apples with mountains.)


Rich

This is indeed a superb point, and one which I've tried less eloquently to stress to some of my friends in the past (I've tended to say that if you have your face 3 inches from the face of a domestic cat, and then put it 3 feet away from a lion, you still know the lion is bigger!!).

It also explains why no matter how close I sit to my 92" screen, it still doesn't feel as 'big' as a proper cinema.