thank you, for your concern. for me, you may be right. i have never seen a 16:9 sceen. i am going to go to a large AV retailer a ways away for me, one of these days. to check out their setups. this will give me a better idea of what i want.
That's a pretty good idea, but keep in mind that you should ask them about their setup and what they are using. Make sure to ask to see 16:9 and 2.35 material on the screen if you can and ask about how much things in there cost. Seeing a $15,000+ setup when you have a $5,000 (total) budget is not going to be a true apples-to-apples comparison.
as it is now, i don't want a tall screen in my room. my dlp's 16:9 image is just fine for me.
If this is the case, then I am thinking that you should go with a 16:9 screen, maximizing the width if that is all your room allows, then letting the screen have black bars when it goes to 2.35:1. This isn't the same as the old letterbox DVDs, but will have black bars above/below the image when viewing 2.35 material. The difference is that you don't gain anything (at all) when you have a small screen and CIH - it makes no sense at all. Especially when you consider that the full 16:9 frame is what the projector is designed to deliver.
In wide rooms with plenty of viewing angle available, going to a wider 2.35 screen with zoom/lens capability can produce excellent results, but in a tighter room, the 16:9 screen is what will fit better and give you a far more immersive experience when you watch 1.85 films or normal HDTV viewing (think football games with the friends). You don't LOSE screen size with 2.35:1 when you do this because you are working with constant image WIDTH instead of constant image height, which for your room, sounds ideal.
that is why i am thinking a scope screen a bit taller than what i have, will do the job nicely.
HUH? Sorry, this sentence confuses me. A scope screen is 2.35:1 and is less tall than a 16:9 (1.78) screen and will reduce the size of your best quality image (1.78).
and still not have a tall screen in my room. i have found a lot of guys think this way = CIH.
I find that a lot of marketing has been spent in the last 2-3 years to convince people that CIH is worth spending $20,000 on, and people have been looking for cheap ways to recreate it for $3,000. This leads to rooms which really just end up being blunders and most custom home theater installers do NOT go with 2.35 unless the customer can actually afford to do it properly and has a room which can accomodate the setup properly. Just doing it because it is cool... Well, you know the saying: "If all your friends jump off a bridge..."
anyway. before i get a screen. i am going to project on my wall. and then rig up some kind of screen. just to test out what i REALLY can live with. then i will DIY what i want.
I strongly encourage this and think this is an excellent solution.
another one of my concerns, is CC placement. i am anal about have it right on the edge of the picture.a scope movie on a 16:9 screen, the CC will a ways away from the picture. not ideal to me.
If you really want the best impact, then I would research DIY AT screens or look into getting an AT screen and get your center channel where it really belongs. If you have a box CC already, then consider a mechanism to raise/lower it.
Obviously, the first step is getting the projector and ensuring it has the flexibility in lens and placement to meet your needs. Most DLP models do NOT have this flexibility, most current LCD models do, and most LCoS models do.
If you are working at about 100" diagonal or so at 16:9, then the JVC models, if you can find one, are easily the best option out there, but the Panasonic with automatic zoom is a no brainer for the poor-mans anamorphic.
