How close is too close? 1:1 screen size to viewing distance wise?

TB303

Active Member
Hello people,
I continue with my journey to design an awesome home cinema setup (within the constraints of the room and significant other).

I played a bit more with measurements and especially the idea of using in wall speakers for LCR (possibly 3x B&W CWM7.4 S2), and painting over a (white) painted screen. I could reach 130" diagonal - which sounds great. However the ideal sitting possition (about middle of the room depth wise) is about 240cm from the projected wall so I'm looking at a ration of 1:1 - which seems very close compared with the results I get from the screen size/distance calculator.

The projector is likely to be acieling mounted Epson 9400 in a white room but relativly lowe ambient light and I can control it. The sound system will be 7.1.4 - the front LCR speakers will be placed about 10cm inwards from the edges of the 'screen' in equal spacing, the center one will be horizontal and the LR vertical, I can get about 85cm horizontal space between all 3, although the left one will be about 45cm from the side wall.

My main concerns are the image quality, the 9400 is 'fake 4k' display (both for 1080p and 4K HDR content) and comfort of viewing over long periods of time. I attached a sketch of the room/space from the Epson projector throw calculator. I have an opening on the right hand side of the wall so can't project anything there.

Thank you, appreciate all the help!
 

Attachments

  • pdf_1621647764922.pdf
    3.9 MB · Views: 31

ShanePJ

Well-known Member
AVForums Sponsor
I think the real limit is your peripheral vision, quality of the material being viewed and what you call a good enough picture to be happy

If you are sat so close to the screen and that it passes your field of view, then you are missing the some areas of the film. If the material you are watching is showing signs of blurring or other unwanted artifacts on screen, then you're screen is to large. Plus, if you are happy with the distance, who cares what the standard says as its you who you've created the home cinema for

Another area to look at when thinking about a how wider a screen you can enjoy. Going down an ultra wide screens (if your projector has the ability via an electronic zoom or anamorphic lens) is one of the best ways to enjoy cinema at home as its harder to enjoy when your vertical peripheral vision is exceeded than it is when the width is exceeded (in my opinion)

A very long time ago, I gave up on what's "standard" when one of my old customer who wanted to play games on a 720p Panasonic PT-AE700 projector and kept moving his seat closer and closer to the screen until he found a point where he was about 1.5m away for a 2m wide screen and said that's perfect. I've also seen many people happy viewing 1080p material with a 3m ultra wide screen when sat 3m away.

So, as I mentioned, its for. If you haven't purchased your screen, but have your projector, why not test it with a white bed sheet (pinned to the wall in both 1.78:1 and 2.35:1 screen ratios to see which one you enjoy the best
 

494930

Distinguished Member
I sit 1:1 from my 'scope screen and find it pretty much spot on, could maybe go slightly closer/larger but the screen material becomes more noticeable the closer you get.

Are you planning on projecting straight onto your wall/speaker grilles?
 

TB303

Active Member
Thank you, can I ask about your screen size/seating distance?

I'll get a proper electric cielling mount accustically transperant screen, I would have tried projecting on the wall/speakers but the Mrs wants to hang art on that wall when it's not in use...
 

494930

Distinguished Member
You can get good results projecting onto a wall but projecting onto the speakers would look really bad so a screen is definitely advisable.

My screen is 2.4m wide and my seat is 2.4m back. I wouldn't go any closer than this with my current screen material (Seymour UF) as the texture become much more noticeable.
 

TB303

Active Member
You can get good results projecting onto a wall but projecting onto the speakers would look really bad so a screen is definitely advisable.

My screen is 2.4m wide and my seat is 2.4m back. I wouldn't go any closer than this with my current screen material (Seymour UF) as the texture become much more noticeable.
Thanks mate, so you have 240cm width so a 103" diagonal?

Those screens look amazing, can I ask how you got one? They don't seem to have a UK representitive... Thank you
 

494930

Distinguished Member
It's actually 244cm wide now that I think about it, so 104" diagonal.

I built my own frame and the screen material was bought direct from seymourav.com They're quite easy to deal with, just need to email asking for a shipped price for the screen your after.
 

TB303

Active Member
Thanks again.

So just to be clear if you have a 104" screen and it looks good at 2.4m away, would a bigger screen at the same distance (and lets say made from the same material) look fine or worse? I'm thinking going 128" at 2.4m viewing distance - thank you
 

494930

Distinguished Member
If that's 128" diagonal I'd say it'd be about perfect for me. 128" wide would probably be a bit too much at that viewing distance imo.
 

TB303

Active Member
If that's 128" diagonal I'd say it'd be about perfect for me. 128" wide would probably be a bit too much at that viewing distance imo.
Thanks, Aiming for 128" Diaginal, probably 126" with the screen and 'stuff' :)

I noticed your projector is native 4K (the 9400 is 'fake 4k' do you notice any difference with HD and 4K content at this distance?
 

494930

Distinguished Member
My projectors faux 4k too, it's pretty much the same system as your 9400 (I actually had a 7300 before getting the LS10500) and there is a noticeable difference between 1080p and 4k content. I'm being held back by my current screen as far as fine detail is concerned (which is why I'd definitely not sit any closer) but the next step up (Dreamscreen) is very expensive.
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
Thanks again.

So just to be clear if you have a 104" screen and it looks good at 2.4m away, would a bigger screen at the same distance (and lets say made from the same material) look fine or worse? I'm thinking going 128" at 2.4m viewing distance - thank you
I assume the measurements you're giving are diagonal for a 16:9 screen.
104" at 8 feet is too small for me when watching Scope. Others find it fine.

I think the best option is to setup somewhere and just watch some films projected onto a blank wall. Personally I'm building a large acoustically transparent screen, about 130" wide x 60" high (sitting about 10' away), which I will constantly mask down to whatever size I want, because while I want some films to show big, there are films which don't suit a large screen.

Image quality will of course be affected by your source. If you're always using Bluray, then you're going to have decent images. Streaming is hit and miss.
 

Harkon321

Well-known Member
My projectors faux 4k too, it's pretty much the same system as your 9400 (I actually had a 7300 before getting the LS10500) and there is a noticeable difference between 1080p and 4k content. I'm being held back by my current screen as far as fine detail is concerned (which is why I'd definitely not sit any closer) but the next step up (Dreamscreen) is very expensive.

What are you using now?
 

Harkon321

Well-known Member
@494930

How close are you then? I was going to move to Seymour UF for my next screen at 2.7m. I’d seen it someone else’s, at 2.8m distance I think, and I didn’t notice the weave. Thought it was the go to choice if you were willing to spend the money. I’ve seen dream screen but that’s very expensive.
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
@494930

How close are you then? I was going to move to Seymour UF for my next screen at 2.7m. I’d seen it someone else’s, at 2.8m distance I think, and I didn’t notice the weave. Thought it was the go to choice if you were willing to spend the money. I’ve seen dream screen but that’s very expensive.
This is about the limit you’d want to go with the UF. Obviously the brighter the projector, the more obvious the weave.

However, as @494930 has mentioned, detail also comes into play when you sit closer (not just the weave pattern), this is where the V7 material is in a different league in comparison.

At 2.7m you should be fine.
 

TB303

Active Member
How does the Grandview screen compare to the Symour, it seems like the only sub £2k option for a 120" electric tab tentioned AT screen in the UK currently. Building or using a fixed screen won't be an option for me... I'll st about 2.4m away. Thank you
 

Harkon321

Well-known Member
This is about the limit you’d want to go with the UF. Obviously the brighter the projector, the more obvious the weave.

Didn't know that, but makes sense. Didn’t notice the weave on yours, even in scenes in the snow (Mission Impossible).
Might get a quote for it, to compare with Seymour.

To above poster, 2.4m is really close. Does it have to be an AT screen?
 

TB303

Active Member
Thanks, the screen has to be AT.
I don't think 2.4m is too close, it's about 60 degrees of the field of vision
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
Thanks, the screen has to be AT.
I don't think 2.4m is too close, it's about 60 degrees of the field of vision
Is is very close, especially for the weave though.

At that distance, only the dreamscreen v7’s weave won’t be visible.

you’ll start to notice pixels as well at that distance.
 

TB303

Active Member
Hmm, thank you.
I don't have many options in terms of seating of accustic screen... When you say pixels will be visible (using Epson 9400) is it really noticable or onnly if you're 'pixel peeking'? Thanks.
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
Hmm, thank you.
I don't have many options in terms of seating of accustic screen... When you say pixels will be visible (using Epson 9400) is it really noticable or onnly if you're 'pixel peeking'? Thanks.
2.4m from a screen that's 2.64m wide: It's not a given that you'll see pixels, but it's possible. The best way to find out is to test.

Is there a reason why you can't project a 120" image onto a wall, and then sit 8' away and see what it looks like?

Where in the country are you?
 

TB303

Active Member
2.4m from a screen that's 2.64m wide: It's not a given that you'll see pixels, but it's possible. The best way to find out is to test.

Is there a reason why you can't project a 120" image onto a wall, and then sit 8' away and see what it looks like?

Where in the country are you?
Hey there,
Because of the 7.1.4 set up if we sit in the middle of the room it’s perfect - if I moved it back the speakers will be very close to each other + some
Cabinets I can’t place satellites on…

im in the London area abs can travel far and wide :)
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
Hey there,
Because of the 7.1.4 set up if we sit in the middle of the room it’s perfect - if I moved it back the speakers will be very close to each other + some
Cabinets I can’t place satellites on…
Well away from what we're discussing: you don't want to be sat exactly in the middle of the length, because you'll get nasty room modes (nulls) in your audio.

But why can't you just project an image onto a blank wall and test it? Paint a wall if necessary. And don't worry about audio, you use any old thing to give you basic sound for the purpose of testing the video, and at what distance and size you can see pixels.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Best Home Cinema Sources and B&W 805 D4 Speaker Review and more...
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

AVForums Podcast: 22nd September 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Creative introduces Sound Blaster Katana V2 soundbar
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Audeze introduces reference LCD-5 planar magnetic headphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Chord Electronics launches Anni desktop amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Roku announces new Streaming Stick 4K and OS 10.5
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom