Question Is 150" too big for my space? and other questions :)

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
forget I suggested it 😎
Ignore Mark.

Well, no. Ignore Mark telling you to ignore Mark. And pay attention to Mark.

Do not forget he suggested it. Dwell on it, and let it eat away at you, until you come to accept that you have to have a fixed AT screen in the blacked out dedicated room that your X7900 deserves!
 

sebna

Well-known Member
Hi Seb

Sorry if I've missed it - is this room to be dual purpose, or is it just for watching films?
It is doubling up as my home office also :).
 

sebna

Well-known Member
Argh, sorry, thought you were putting a fixed screen up. In that case, forget I suggested it 😎
I am, putting the fixed frame screen on the wall but correct me if I am wrong to put the speakers behind I would have to a) get a AT screen and also preferably build a stud wall to hide the speakers in the wall (with opening for the screen and speakers behind it)? Or did you had something else in mind?
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
I am, putting the fixed frame screen on the wall but correct me if I am wrong to put the speakers behind I would have to a) get a AT screen and also preferably build a stud wall to hide the speakers in the wall (with opening for the screen and speakers behind it)? Or did you had something else in mind?
Just build a bracket to mount away from the wall. Took me a couple of hours.

Honestly, it’s so much better it’s not funny.

If you have the choice, don’t even hesitate.

Yes it will cost more, the the sound will pan seamlessly, it will sound like its coming direct from the actors mouths and as you can’t see your speakers, an optical illusion means you won’t find the sound coming from the speaker itself.
 

sebna

Well-known Member
Just build a bracket to mount away from the wall. Took me a couple of hours.

Honestly, it’s so much better it’s not funny.

If you have the choice, don’t even hesitate.

Yes it will cost more, the the sound will pan seamlessly, it will sound like its coming direct from the actors mouths and as you can’t see your speakers, an optical illusion means you won’t find the sound coming from the speaker itself.
Hmm :D... I have to do some more rendering :)

In the meantime. When you said you had your 7900 right against the wall did you mean that it was as close as possible with only margin for HDMI cable? Like less then 10cm?

I am asking because the closer to the wall I will get it the less zoom I will be forced to use = more contrast :D
 

sebna

Well-known Member
Screen wise - should I be aiming for grey to boost the contrast because of my walls (I will only watch in pitch black conditions other the light from PJ) or can I get away with white one?

Or should I be looking not only at grey but full blown ALM?

What would you do?
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
Hmm :D... I have to do some more rendering :)

In the meantime. When you said you had your 7900 right against the wall did you mean that it was as close as possible with only margin for HDMI cable? Like less then 10cm?

I am asking because the closer to the wall I will get it the less zoom I will be forced to use = more contrast :D
The zoom doesn’t make that much different in reality, a few Cm of zoom would be negligible.
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
Screen wise - should I be aiming for grey to boost the contrast because of my walls (I will only watch in pitch black conditions other the light from PJ) or can I get away with white one?

Or should I be looking not only at grey but full blown ALM?

What would you do?
Me?

I’d cover the walls and ceilings in velvet! 🤣

Not sure what options you’ve got with different gain screens if you decide to go AT.
 

Luminated67

Well-known Member
It is doubling up as my home office also :).
You could easily either paint the 2.5M back from your screen in a very dark grey paint or go my route of self adhesive flock for the cinema section of this room and leave the rest light and airy. Your x7900 will thank you no end and it also means you can go for a white screen and don’t have to go for a Grey/ALR screen to get back the contrast lose from leaving the walls/ceiling light.

I am, putting the fixed frame screen on the wall but correct me if I am wrong to put the speakers behind I would have to a) get a AT screen and also preferably build a stud wall to hide the speakers in the wall (with opening for the screen and speakers behind it)? Or did you had something else in mind?
If you haven’t bought the speakers then there is nothing to stop you surface mounting these to the was and moving the screen about a foot forward unless this foot will cause you to have to decrease the screen size. If I were to do it again I would have hid my speakers but the electrician f***ed up my cables so I had to surface run the cables.

AT screens are a little bit more expensive and sitting as close as you want to do you might see the weave unless you paid decent money for a better quality one like Seymour.

Out of curiosity what speakers are you looking at?
 

Luminated67

Well-known Member
Me?

I’d cover the walls and ceilings in velvet! 🤣

Not sure what options you’ve got with different gain screens if you decide to go AT.
There are grey screens with micro holes which are ALR though I don’t know how good they actually are or whether you will notice the holes from his proposed viewing distance. I know HiViLux sell Fixed Frame ALR AT screens and I’m sure they could send him a piece of material to sample to see if it does the job.


Or a zero edge one

 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
There are grey screens with micro holes which are ALR though I don’t know how good they actually are or whether you will notice the holes from his proposed viewing distance. I know HiViLux sell Fixed Frame ALR AT screens and I’m sure they could send him a piece of material to sample to see if it does the job.


Or a zero edge one

Perforated screens are pretty horrible though, you can even notice them at the cinema if you sit relatively close.
 

Luminated67

Well-known Member
Perforated screens are pretty horrible though, you can even notice them at the cinema if you sit relatively close.
I’m not sure if the material is the same between commercial and domestic but there’s no harm in requesting a sample piece to see. o_O

Nothing ventured nothing gained.

But I’m like you firmly in the treat the walls and ceiling camp. :smashin:
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
It is doubling up as my home office also :).
So not the wife's home office?

Get a fixed AT screen, put the speakers behind it, and work out how to black out the room (I don't mean windows, I mean walls) when it's film time.
 

mb3195

Distinguished Member
I’m not sure if the material is the same between commercial and domestic but there’s no harm in requesting a sample piece to see. o_O

Nothing ventured nothing gained.

But I’m like you firmly in the treat the walls and ceiling camp. :smashin:
I tried quite a few samples previously, but yeah, no harm in trying.
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
Screen wise - should I be aiming for grey to boost the contrast because of my walls (I will only watch in pitch black conditions other the light from PJ) or can I get away with white one?

Or should I be looking not only at grey but full blown ALM?

What would you do?
Me?

I’d cover the walls and ceilings in velvet! 🤣
This.

I haven't owned either, but it's patently obvious that an Epson 9400 in a blacked out room will provide far more contrast than a JVC X7900 in a light coloured room.

You've got yourself a great projector. Do whatever you can to reduce in room reflections when it's film time.
 

Luminated67

Well-known Member
This.

I haven't owned either, but it's patently obvious that an Epson 9400 in a blacked out room will provide far more contrast than a JVC X7900 in a light coloured room.

You've got yourself a great projector. Do whatever you can to reduce in room reflections when it's film time.
Agreed it’s like me buying my M5 and having it limited to 60mph. :facepalm:
 

Owl40

Active Member
If your focus is more on movies than music then it’s a no brainer go for an AT screen. Putting the centre speaker underneath the screen is a real compromise. Matched speakers at the same level makes the panning and dialogue a lot better. In terms of making the screen pop then velvet is your friend. I’m slowly turning my room into a dedicated velvet bat 🦇 cave and it’s also my office. Tbh I find it easier to work in darker room with a lamp, helps me focus. If I had a load of windows I would be staring out daydreaming.

I’ve currently got a non-AT screen and will be switching to an AT screen at some point this year.
 

FelixIo

Member
Hey @sebna,

Didn't read all the conversation here, but I thought I tell you about my setup, which is (I believe) EXACTLY (or pretty close) with what you have and want to accomplish (BTW, I also did not saw your room dimensions either, or couldn't figure them out).

So here are the details of my setup/room:
* Living room
- in an appartment building
- dimensions - windows to the back wall = 4,6 meters, side to side = 4,2 meters, height 2,48 meters

* Screen = EliteScreen electric 150 inch diagonal, 1,1 gain

* Projector(s)
- (old one) Epson EH-TW5200 - 2560 hours on the second lamp
- (new one) Epson EH-TW9400 - 510 hours, since mid November 2019 when I bought it

* The seating = a 3 seats couch, placed about 40 centimeters away from the back wall, and the distance to the surface of the screen from my face is 3,6 meters (measured with an laser measuring device)

With old projector, mounted with an ceiling mount, at about 20 centimeters from ceiling and 10 centimeter from the back wall (to the back of the projector), the screen fills completely, with zoom as almost maximum. Never considered that the image is not enough lighted up, even at day, with light comming from one doorway that I can't (for the moment), cover, which is almost at the back of the room on the left side wall

With new projector (EH-TW9400), mounted on a kind of a shelf, with the projector almost touching the back wall (let's say 1 centimeter distance), the screen (150 inch) can't be filled at maximum zoom, and I would estimate around 110-120 inch diagonal of the image. The image on this one is MUCH brighter and detailed.

I am wearing glasses (miopia since childhood), and NEVER considered my screen too big! Always felt confortable watching anything on it at this size, even if it is not even close of the "sensation/feeling" that I have when I do to IMAX on my preferred places in the theater.
Yet, now I can't watch a TV that would be at the same distance, I would fell like watching a "stamp" by comparison (is good that I "throw out" all TV's I had many years ago ;)). Anyone that come and watched with me, at the first impresion they said it is GINORMOUS/HUGE, but after a little whatching, they said is VERY confortable and when they had to go back to their homes with their TV's, they felt sorry (that's what they said, that they would wanted to have a HUGE screen too).

To also support you with some visualisation of the screen setup, here are some pictures I took several years ago, when at the beginning, when started to build the "home cinema" in the living room, which can be used for both functions, living room and "Home Cinema".
1596309592889.png

view from the couch, with the screen rolled up, and the drapes almost opened (sorry for the not finished install of the monitor and center speaker ;))

1596309787790.png

with the drapes (almost "black-out"), closed

1596309655739.png

and "his majesty", the screen (150 inch diagonal)

1596309846890.png


1596309871135.png


Hope this helps!

If you need/want other details, ask away! :)
 
Last edited:

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
Here’s a direct comparison on the same scene from Gemini Man. LG OLED top image and Epson bottom, ignore the colour differences because the Epson has been professionally calibrated and the LG hasn’t, concentrate on the sharpness and detail in the images. But it does show the importance of getting it calibrated.

View attachment 1342678View attachment 1342681

Both look great but when I go upstairs to the movie room I can instantly see the superior detail from the Epson.

Just reflecting on your OLED picture, have OLEDs MASSIVELY improved in terms of sharpness of image? Because the difference between my pictures (first photo is MINIMAL sharpening) and yours is night and day..?

Mine was using a CX.
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
Just reflecting on your OLED picture, have OLEDs MASSIVELY improved in terms of sharpness of image? Because the difference between my pictures (first photo is MINIMAL sharpening) and yours is night and day..?
I'm surprised if there's a problem with the sharpness of an OLED. The photos, however, are a different matter. I don't think you can use someone's photos of their screens as a good judge of how good the screens are. Lumi tries to get the results to look how he sees the results in room, but that's a pretty tough task, made even harder by using a phone, which is adding its own sharpening to an image that's already sharpened.
 

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
I'm surprised if there's a problem with the sharpness of an OLED. The photos, however, are a different matter. I don't think you can use someone's photos of their screens as a good judge of how good the screens are. Lumi tries to get the results to look how he sees the results in room, but that's a pretty tough task, made even harder by using a phone, which is adding its own sharpening to an image that's already sharpened.

The difference between our two OLEDs is huge though, hence why I was wondering if maybe improvements had been made in OLED panels over the years or not.

I get trying to match colours and black levels to look similar to what you see in a room but sharpness is really not hard to capture on a flat panel IMO.

Its literally find focus and take the photo (I'm quite into photography). I didn't think the difference should be that darastic.
 

Triggaaar

Distinguished Member
The difference between our two OLEDs is huge though, hence why I was wondering if maybe improvements had been made in OLED panels over the years or not.
Can you post the two photos you're comparing? The 'sharper' (over sharpened) image Lumi posted was from the Epson I think.

I get trying to match colours and black levels to look similar to what you see in a room but sharpness is really not hard to capture on a flat panel IMO.

Its literally find focus and take the photo (I'm quite into photography).
It's not that simple, because the display has created an artificial image (due settings like sharpness and contrast), and then the camera software is doing the same thing on top (I'm also quite into photography, I'm a portrait photographer).
 

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
Can you post the two photos you're comparing? The 'sharper' (over sharpened) image Lumi posted was from the Epson I think.

It's not that simple, because the display has created an artificial image (due settings like sharpness and contrast), and then the camera software is doing the same thing on top (I'm also quite into photography, I'm a portrait photographer).
I'm referring to the photos I posted from my LG of the same film and the same scene.

If you're using the same camera, then taking photos of the two devices should not be THAT darastically different. The LG looks crazy soft in his photo, and the Epson looks crazy sharp.

I'm just thinking maybe his LG OLED settings are off, or LG have made huge strides in the sharpness of image produced by their TVs in the last couple of years because the picture he posted no way in any world resembles what I see on my LG OLED (which is 77'' so a bit bigger.. so should look less sharper).
 

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
So this is just using the TV settings (no image processor or MADVR) to replicate the sharpness difference within the TV set.

The softer one is what the creator intended (filmmaker mode, no image processing on, toned down the sharpening).
The 'sharper' one is, well, a sharpened image by the TV.

I could push the sharper second image farther but it is already looking IMO way too over sharpened and starting to illustrate one too many artifacts.

Projectors HAVE to do some form of sharpening because the projection is so huge but there is a difference between subtle and well not-so-subtle sharpening, which I think the settings on the Epson is producing. Now it doesn't really matter.. if you enjoy that look, brilliant but its not down to the sharpness of the lens.

I'm a bit into photography. This is not down to the lens of the projector being sharper or the panel. It's very similar to someone in photoshop messing with the 'clarity' and 'sharpness' slider in post.


I actually do like a sharper image so both on my old Epson and LG, I used to use a bit of artifical sharpening :D

However I really wouldn't use it as a unique selling point or advantage over a TV or any other projector. Most projectors can do it. Epson's slightly rely on it more than say other devices because its not a native 4K projector. If we disable ALL image enhancements on the Epson but leave it in 4k-eshift mode, I found the image to be a bit soft (well actually very soft, but this could also be due to the high size) (but then again, who cares as we can just enable it again :D).

I linked the images I took in my post here, which are pretty much as I see them.

The LG OLED photo is crazily soft compared to mine, hence why I'm wondering if LG made some qunatum leaps in picture processing.

Soft:
Sharp:
Other:
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Home AV, TV, Tech News & Reviews, Plus The Best of July 2020

Trending threads

Latest News

Linn announces Majik DSM digital streamer upgrade
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sony announces WH-1000XM4 noise cancelling headphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh launches C22 Mk V preamp and MC1502 power amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Marantz unveils 12 Series Special Edition models
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung Galaxy Note 20 smart phone models launched
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom