Early stage planning of upgrading to projection

[Ras777]

I am in the early stages of upgrading my 65" Plasma to projection. Timeframe right now is about 18 months. I know little about all the different types of projection except the fact that Sony has a 4k HDR model that has piqued my interest. My budget is around $5000. I have a dedicated HT room that is 21x18x8 that can get very dark and I sit about 12 feet from the screen. I am thinking a 120" screen. I am pretty particular with picture quality and might go with a flat panel depending on how close these projectors can get to a 75" or larger flat panel in the same price range. It's not all about 4k for me but the ability to produce a very nice HDR picture. I know its 18 months out and we don't have a crystal ball but what options would you be looking at with that budget. What do you think of Dolby Vision, HDR10+ or even HDMI 2.1. When will these be viable in the projection arena at my price point? Thanks!

 

[everettT]

With controlled lighting you have a lot of options. The only thing I can recommend in your current timeframe is a larger screen, 120" isnt gonna be what you want in the long run, if your going to do 4k or eventually 8k.

 

[Drunkpenguin]

If its a dedicated theater forget the tv idea and go projector. 80" tvs are tiny in a room that size.

I can give you some perspective on screen size because our rooms are nearly identical. Mine is 22x17 and I also sit about 12' back. I have a 120" 16x9 screen and I find it to be the perfect size. You could get away with larger tho if you want. What I would suggest is buying the PJ first and project it on the wall to determine the size screen you want. You can also put tape on the walls to visualize different screen sizes and how they will fit.

I dont know much about the PJ you are looking at, but what is your throw distance? How far with the PJ be from the screen? Mine is ceiling mounted right behind the front row of seats, probably around 14 feet or so.

 

[Ras777]

Mine would also be ceiling mounted. I have a lot of flexibility and could put the PJ anywhere along the center of the ceiling. I could mount directly overhead at 12 feet or back to approx. 18 feet. What is the optimal throw distance? Should I go with a little bigger screen size? How far off the floor should a screen be? I ask this because I have an angled wall in back of screen which would prevent me from having the full 8 foot ceiling to work with. If I put my screen 3 feet from the back wall it would give me 7 feet to work with.

 

[Drunkpenguin]

Do you have a back row? If yes you need to make sure they can see the entire screen. If not go with whatever is comfortable. Generally the lower the better so you dont have to look up to much. Some of the pros will find this thread and give you better ideas on throw distance for selected PJ.

 

[Drunkpenguin]

Also since you are in the early planning. You might think about an accoustically transparent screen so you can put the speakers behind it. This makes the sound pretty awesome. I recently redid my theater and it sounds much more fluid then having speakers on the sides or below it.

 

[Danzilla31]

I am in the early stages of upgrading my 65" Plasma to projection. Timeframe right now is about 18 months. I know little about all the different types of projection except the fact that Sony has a 4k HDR model that has piqued my interest. My budget is around $5000. I have a dedicated HT room that is 21x18x8 that can get very dark and I sit about 12 feet from the screen. I am thinking a 120" screen. I am pretty particular with picture quality and might go with a flat panel depending on how close these projectors can get to a 75" or larger flat panel in the same price range. It's not all about 4k for me but the ability to produce a very nice HDR picture. I know its 18 months out and we don't have a crystal ball but what options would you be looking at with that budget. What do you think of Dolby Vision, HDR10+ or even HDMI 2.1. When will these be viable in the projection arena at my price point? Thanks!

Hah I just posted a thread before you about upgrading to a projector my budget is exactly the same. I'll be following this thread with great interest since our topic is the same. Good luck to you on finding a good projector! If I get any answerson options to look at on my thread I posted I'll for sure let you know!

 

[Ras777]

No back row. Having the speakers behind the screen is definitely an option as long as they don't degrade sound quality. Danzilla31 thanks I appreciate that.

 

[Danzilla31]

No back row. Having the speakers behind the screen is definitely an option as long as they don't degrade sound quality. Danzilla31 thanks I appreciate that.

One thing I've already found in my research is that if you can put the speakers behind the screens it is a huge plus.

It frees up space looks slick and actually can improve the sound as dialogue sounds like it's coming from right out of the screen. It frees up options for your speakers as they don't have to look pretty sitting behind the screen. You can get whatever fits back there.

From what I understand they make acousticaly transparent screens. Some of the members with better experience can steer you to what to buy on those.

If I could do it your way I would for sure set my stuff up that way. I'm very lucky in my setup my towers fit perfectly under where the screen will be otherwise I'd be having some issues because I love running my front 3 with matching towers

 

[Drunkpenguin]

I went with a silver ticket at screen. Its the most affordable. I ordered samples from several companies and the more expensive screen were maybe a few percentage points better, but not worth 3 to 4 times the cost. I had a regular screen for 10 years and noticed no sound loss when I went transparent. Its one of the best upgrades Ive ever done. Now the voices sound like they come right out of their mouths, instead of below the screen.

FWIW I consider myself an audiophile and value the sound WAY above the video.

 

[Ras777]

Not sure how they accomplish that but this will allow me to go with a bigger screen. Do you think sitting 12ft from a 140” screen would be ok?

 

[Drunkpenguin]

An AT screen is like adding another layer of speaker grill. So any affect is minimal at best and audyssey probably fixes it in EQ. I could go 140 and still be comfortable I think. IMO if you go to big it can wear you out because your eyes have to jet back and forth all the time. Thats why I suggest getting the pj before the screen so you can play a bit and get it right the first time. With my screen a 2.35 filmed movie feels natural and perfect. But some times a 16x9 movie feels huge and can give me a bit of eyestrain at times.

 

[Ras777]

When I sit in a full size commercial theater I always sit about 2/3 of the way back. Otherwise I find it fatiguing. I like your idea about putting it on the wall before purchasing the screen but my angled ceiling will make that challenging.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Typical home theater setups typically have 10" to 12" of screen diagonal for each foot of viewing distance. With your theater seating location, I think that 10" of diagonal for each foot is appropriate, which means a 120" diagonal is the right size.

For AT screens a speakers behind the screen, you need a lot of planning, and typically a false wall, or very good in-wall speakers to pull it off properly. I like it, but if your room allows for speakers in the space you can have an excellent setup without the cost associated with an AT screen. As well, I have heard some real issues exist with moire patterns with AT screens and 4K projectors. Which leans me towards recommending a normal screen.

JVC and Sony both have native 4K projectors that are in the $5,000 price range. Likely available for less, and certainly for less in the 18 month from now time span. JVC and Sony fight on similar grounds with 4K and front projection. They both use LCoS and they both deliver an incredible image.

For your part, a home theater means painting the room dark, using dark furniture, properly controlling all ambient lighting, and what lighting that exists should be on dimmers with zones that aren't near the screen. Proper thought of how and where you want lights is a critical item that almost everyone overlooks. Put in LOTS of lights if the room is painted dark, but put them into several zones and all of them on dimmers. So, the screen area stays completely dark, while lighting over seating can have some light, and other lighting in the room can be controlled separately as well.

I think it's way early to determine a specific model number to buy, but the Sony 285ES and JVC DLA-NX5 (DLA RS-1000) are the models to give a look at right now.

 

[Ras777]

Thanks for the information BMXTRIX. How would a 4k HDR pj like the Sony compare to a comparably priced OLED? Do you think the size diff. of a screen trumps the resolution of a flat panel?

 

[BMXTRIX]

I have a 85" television in my family room. It's a nice Samsung display. Not as nice as my old plasma, but it's a solid product.

Then I have a 161" front projection setup in my basement.

The projector setup was actually pretty inexpensive. So, it doesn't touch the black levels that JVC or Sony can deliver. But, the immersion is something else. I swear by the concept that a big TV is a big TV is a big TV. Front projection is the ONLY way to do home theater. Period. So, for look and feel, you truly get a cinematic experience with front projection that you can't with any other technology that I've seen. It's much more natural to see the light reflected off the screen into your eyes.

Now, to be clear, if you are looking at the 285ES or the NX5, you are looking at the same 4K resolution that the flat panel OLED delivers. There is no change in resolution. It's just a size difference. A 60" OLED from 6' is the same as a 120" front projector at 12'. The resolution is the same, and image quality, sharpness, clarity, and detail can match up nicely.

Brightness can not.

Projectors simply aren't as bright as flat panel displays and that plays something of an issue with HDR content as specular highlights can't peak up the way that they can with flat panels. It's going to remain an issue for years I expect, but even with flat panels they are constantly working to come up with a few thousand extra nits that they only need from time to time.

The other issue is contrast, as you are pushing a ton of light through a very small amount of space with the lens and the internals of the projector. While LCoS and JVC/Sony do a better job than most, it's still not as good as OLED delivers. But, it can be better than the LCD TVs can deliver, or at least close to on par with the better LCD displays. Plus, no burn in and no issues with viewing angle (with a good screen).

I've installed a few JVC and Sony models and am always jealous of the quality that they deliver. JVC especially is my fan favorite. But, with how new the native JVC 4K models are (just coming to market now), it will be a while before the real head-to-head of JVC and Sony is known.

 

[Ras777]

Thank you very much for that information! That's exactly what I was looking for. I am still 18 months out so it will be interesting to see who wins this battle. So my guess is things like HDR 10+ and HDMI 2.1 are still several years out?

 

[BMXTRIX]

Well, we've had 4K and HDMI 2.0 for a while now and there is almost ZERO content for it, so don't expect almost anything in the HDMI 2.1 world for quite a while. TVs included. HDMI 2.1 may run ahead of any displays that can use it successfully. Moreso, there is likely to be zero content for it for years to come. Certainly nothing better than a UHD Blu-ray Disc.

HDR and HDR 10 and all the other HDR stuff is just crap really. It really is. It's just a different way of defining the color space that already exists for those displays that can properly support it. Having it, supporting it, the rest... it's all garbage.

The EXPANDED color space is great, but calling it something new is some silliness really IMO.

No, don't count on much excitement about it since almost nobody is wrapping their heads around HDMI 2.0 and the 18Gbs setups yet. The 48Gbs that HDMI 2.1 offers is likely a lot further off.

But, when things go that way, I expect JVC will be there as one of the ones leading the pack. We'll see what happens in the DLP camp. But, they've been lagging behind on quality for years at the higher end.

 

[Ras777]

I am really surprised that you think HDR is crap. From everything, I've read its the 4K that's the marketing gimmick, at least with flat panels. HDR is really what makes the picture so much better than 1080P. I see you are an installer so you are a lot more connected then I am. I was really under the impression that dynamic HDR coupled with a high-end OLED was the holy grail of picture quality.

 

[Danzilla31]

I am really surprised that you think HDR is crap. From everything, I've read its the 4K that's the marketing gimmick, at least with flat panels. HDR is really what makes the picture so much better than 1080P. I see you are an installer so you are a lot more connected then I am. I was really under the impression that dynamic HDR coupled with a high-end OLED was the holy grail of picture quality.

From what I'm understanding from what he posted a) it's not very great if you don't have the equipment and content to support it. And there's not a ton of content for it right now. Also they basically improved the Tv's ability to use color. Expanding the color range where he takes issue is the marketing gimmicks the fancy new names etc etc so they can make extra money off of it. Saying it's something new when it's just improving something that was already there. At least that's how I'm reading into it