Is this really the answer?

[rmk]

We watched Baraka on Bluray last night. This re-mastered 65MM (watch the Bonus features where they discuss the custom built camera) disk is a feast for the eyes and ears. Stunning images of our world and the DTS HDMA track is almost as good as the video. If you have a high quality HT system, this is a must see film.

It struck me that with my current JVC HD100 (RS2) and the Stewart StudioTek screen I have what essentially looks like a 106”, 1080P plasma, and a very good one at that. I admit, the black bars top and bottom were noticable but did not affect my enjoyment of the film. As intrigued as I am with the whole CIH (constant image height) idea, after some research it seems foolish to spend many thousands of dollars to resolve what should be a rather simple image size display problem. Rather than external lenses with motorized sleds to move them in and out of the light path, shouldn’t this rather basic image control be handled internally by the projector itself?

Screen masking is another issue that is awkward and cumbersome in the current best case scenario. The commercial motorized masking systems I have seen look like competent DIY solutions with way to many motors and moving parts to be seamless and reliable.

I can only imagine how PO’ed the owner of a mega buck CIH HT would be while first time viewing The Dark Knight on BR only to have to pause the picture and make zoom/masking adjustments.

Now that the consumers appetite has been wetted with workable if imperfect Home Theater components, I believe a strong market exists for the next level. The first manufacturer(s) to come up with a 100" plus display system capable of handeling all of the video formats for say $10K will enjoy robust sales. I know I would go for that in a heartbeat.

With all of that said, the obvious solution is to move from the primitive Front Projection systems to an affordable big screen LCD variant. I just hope I live long enough to see this come to pass.

 

[jostenmeat]

Hey, what's up rmk? I'm glad you're enjoying the fruits of your labor!

Just to be clear, I ask if this thread is mostly concerned with anamorphic capability, but with other benefits attached, such as reliability, affordability, and possibly good looks?

I would guess that I would agree with you that there is a market, but not many here will spend 10k on their video rig. In fact, maybe not a single soul here has spent that much on it.

IMO, for now at least, the best benefit of anamorphic is better center speaker placement, given the relatively large size of FP display, and of course assuming a non AT rig. In your own setup, from what I remember, this rather seems to be a non-issue.

I don't like LCD displays. If I was filthy rich, maybe I'd own one of those enormous Panasonic plasmas. I know Mark Cuban bought one. I asked my friend who has worked for a long time for that company, about the weight and mounting instructions! (They have one in the storage room at his work). I forget any detail he might have known, but there needs to be special wall construction I believe.

My display looks like a 159" plasma. Less than $4k all-in, taxes, shipped. It will be a very long time before I can afford a flat panel anywhere close to that size, with anywhere near the same PQ. I might even have to get myself cryogenically frozen if I want to see that day.

So, yes, if you're asking me, this is really the answer, at least in my lifetime. Granted, at 65" or less, I am buying a plasma. The nicest display larger than that of which I've seen is neither a flat panel or FP, but an RPTV in the Sony XBR2s that are since dc'd. 70" was about $5k.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[rmk]

Hey, what's up rmk? I'm glad you're enjoying the fruits of your labor!

Just to be clear, I ask if this thread is mostly concerned with anamorphic capability, but with other benefits attached, such as reliability, affordability, and possibly good looks?

I would guess that I would agree with you that there is a market, but not many here will spend 10k on their video rig. In fact, maybe not a single soul here has spent that much on it.

IMO, for now at least, the best benefit of anamorphic is better center speaker placement, given the relatively large size of FP display, and of course assuming a non AT rig. In your own setup, from what I remember, this rather seems to be a non-issue.

I don't like LCD displays. If I was filthy rich, maybe I'd own one of those enormous Panasonic plasmas. I know Mark Cuban bought one. I asked my friend who has worked for a long time for that company, about the weight and mounting instructions! (They have one in the storage room at his work). I forget any detail he might have known, but there needs to be special wall construction I believe.

My display looks like a 159" plasma. Less than $4k all-in, taxes, shipped. It will be a very long time before I can afford a flat panel anywhere close to that size, with anywhere near the same PQ. I might even have to get myself cryogenically frozen if I want to see that day.

So, yes, if you're asking me, this is really the answer, at least in my lifetime. Granted, at 65" or less, I am buying a plasma. The nicest display larger than that of which I've seen is neither a flat panel or FP, but an RPTV in the Sony XBR2s that are since dc'd. 70" was about $5k.

Thanks for the discussion.

Yeah, it’s all good JM. I am enjoying my new video system but I have been looking into CIH lens and masking system and they all seem so Rube Goldberg to me. It would be nice if Hollywood could standardize on an aspect ratio. That would sure make it easier on us HT aficionados.

The new Samsung LED based LCD's look very promising. Great black levels, energy efficient and thin. I'm thinking that in a few years there will be active displays that will roll out on the wall any size you like with PQ that will curl your toes. Be sure to remind me if I'm wrong about this .

 

[Sherardp]

I think a cheaper solution would be a nice masking system. I myself am looking into the Masquerade from Carada as it does not look like a cheap DIY solution and seems to be well thought out. I too enjoy the high quality image, now having the RS10 in my setup. Something else to consider RMK as the Carada solution will work with your Stewart screen and save you quite a bit of coin.

Since owning the RS10 I can just barely see the black bars with 2:35 material. The RS2 should be close in black level performance though the specs on the RS10 are 32k:1. JM, if you seen one I know you'd want it bro. Enjoy guys

 

[rmk]

I think a cheaper solution would be a nice masking system. I myself am looking into the Masquerade from Carada as it does not look like a cheap DIY solution and seems to be well thought out. I too enjoy the high quality image, now having the RS10 in my setup. Something else to consider RMK as the Carada solution will work with your Stewart screen and save you quite a bit of coin.

Since owning the RS10 I can just barely see the black bars with 2:35 material. The RS2 should be close in black level performance though the specs on the RS10 are 32k:1. JM, if you seen one I know you'd want it bro. Enjoy guys

I have seen the Carada. It does seem well made but I believe it is only a horizontal masking system. That could be problematic with all of the aspect ratios these days.

 

[Matt34]

Like you said Rob, it would be nice if there was a standard in the industry. Sure would make it a lot easier on the end user but I don't think that's very high on any of their "To-Do lists"

In one of the Home Theater episodes on the DIY channel a professional baseball player had a pretty elabrate masking system that could do every aspect ratio. I'm sure it probably wasn't under 10k however.

This doesn't list all of the episodes and I'm not every sure if it's in the text of one of these or not.

http://www.diynetwork.com/diy/episode_archive/0,2019,DIY_20437_487,00.html

 

[jostenmeat]

It would be nice if Hollywood could standardize on an aspect ratio. That would sure make it easier on us HT aficionados.

Like you said Rob, it would be nice if there was a standard in the industry. Sure would make it a lot easier on the end user but I don't think that's very high on any of their "To-Do lists"

I've seen this said a lot. However, it would put a limit on the artist's intent/desires. Sometimes they actually film a movie in a "taller" AR, and then will mask some of the top and bottom, actually removing some video information for even the theatrical release, because they find the overall delivery to be more desirable.

Maybe to appease some more folks, there could be a standard on the displays themselves; perhaps something like a "continuously variable" zoom function.

Then realize that motion pictures have been around long enough now where we have too many different ARs used already.

Since owning the RS10 I can just barely see the black bars with 2:35 material. The RS2 should be close in black level performance though the specs on the RS10 are 32k:1. JM, if you seen one I know you'd want it bro. Enjoy guys

You keep saying this.

SHHHHH!!!

lol

 

[Sherardp]

LMAO @ JM. Carada does offer both a vertical and horizontal masking system. So that works out for everyone. See the link below, click on the word horizontal or vertical for pricing. Not bad prices either and from the reports @ AVS a very nice system.

http://carada.com/Masquerade-Masking-System-Projection-Screens.aspx

 

[BMXTRIX]

While the dream of 100" displays is a nice idea, the reality remains that there hasn't been anything far beyond the tube TV for over two generations, and as we move into flat panel displays, the concept of the really big display still is daunting to many people.

Perhaps we will someday have those windows in our home from Total Recall that just put up whatever image we want with perfect clarity, but until then, we have the next best thing with front projection in our homes.

Realistically, for under $1,000 you can get a 100" screen and a HD projector which rivals $25,000 setups from just a decade ago. That's pretty darn amazing no matter how you look at it.

I've personally never been a fan of 2.35:1 CIH setups at all for the microscopic gain in quality you MAY receive compared to the cash laid out it is ridiculous to not simply ignore the nearly invisible black bars above and below the image, just as we do with plasmas and LCDs - and we will continue to do for decades to come.

Masking systems are great if you gotta have it framed perfectly, and if they made 2.35:1 (or wider) projectors natively with infinite contrast and thousands of lumens available, then it would be a great way to do everything natively with some super duper HD format which could handle it all.

Yet, I think it's silly to wish for anything more without truly acknowledging just how far we have come in less than a decade with HD technology. When, a decade ago there were people in the Washington DC area at WETA who were jumping up and down in excitement because they were able to broadcast AND receive snow in HD. Not snowfall, but when a screen goes blank and just shows 'snow' on screen. When they achieved that in HD, it was one of the first publicly broadcast HD images ever by any network that early in the HD game.

In those days people were dropping about $20,000 for a line DOUBLER to pair with their 250 lumen CRT projector ($25,000+) which required semi-annual, if not monthly maintenance to retain a best possible image.

Now, here we are about ten years later and that line doubler for $20K is outperformed by the processing in my iPod Touch. Your cheapest HD displays from Vizio have more overall capability, processing, and raw performance than $100,000 systems of a decade prior.

The $20,000 initial HD projectors to hit the market are now outclassed by sub $1,000 projectors today, and those projectors offer greater installation flexibility with a better image and brightness which CRT was never able to touch.

Is this really the answer?

Geez, if it is NOT the answer, I sure as heck can't wait to see what the next answer is! I'm pretty darn happy with the answer we've already been given, that's for sure.

 

[rmk]

This new projector system looks interesting.

 

[rmk]

While the dream of 100" displays is a nice idea, the reality remains that there hasn't been anything far beyond the tube TV for over two generations, and as we move into flat panel displays, the concept of the really big display still is daunting to many people.

Perhaps we will someday have those windows in our home from Total Recall that just put up whatever image we want with perfect clarity, but until then, we have the next best thing with front projection in our homes.

Realistically, for under $1,000 you can get a 100" screen and a HD projector which rivals $25,000 setups from just a decade ago. That's pretty darn amazing no matter how you look at it.

I've personally never been a fan of 2.35:1 CIH setups at all for the microscopic gain in quality you MAY receive compared to the cash laid out it is ridiculous to not simply ignore the nearly invisible black bars above and below the image, just as we do with plasmas and LCDs - and we will continue to do for decades to come.

Masking systems are great if you gotta have it framed perfectly, and if they made 2.35:1 (or wider) projectors natively with infinite contrast and thousands of lumens available, then it would be a great way to do everything natively with some super duper HD format which could handle it all.

Yet, I think it's silly to wish for anything more without truly acknowledging just how far we have come in less than a decade with HD technology. When, a decade ago there were people in the Washington DC area at WETA who were jumping up and down in excitement because they were able to broadcast AND receive snow in HD. Not snowfall, but when a screen goes blank and just shows 'snow' on screen. When they achieved that in HD, it was one of the first publicly broadcast HD images ever by any network that early in the HD game.

In those days people were dropping about $20,000 for a line DOUBLER to pair with their 250 lumen CRT projector ($25,000+) which required semi-annual, if not monthly maintenance to retain a best possible image.

Now, here we are about ten years later and that line doubler for $20K is outperformed by the processing in my iPod Touch. Your cheapest HD displays from Vizio have more overall capability, processing, and raw performance than $100,000 systems of a decade prior.

The $20,000 initial HD projectors to hit the market are now outclassed by sub $1,000 projectors today, and those projectors offer greater installation flexibility with a better image and brightness which CRT was never able to touch.

Is this really the answer?

Geez, if it is NOT the answer, I sure as heck can't wait to see what the next answer is! I'm pretty darn happy with the answer we've already been given, that's for sure.

It is hard to argue with your very pragmatic take on this so I won’t.

However, everything you said being true HT still requires a dark space in order to operate at anywhere near optimum levels. Specific details aside, my hope is for a system that has the BIG screen (120”) look and feel of FP, but with the brightness and ambient light rejection of Plasma/LCD.

Is that too much to ask? For now yes, but if there is a market … it will come.