Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Ideas for Home Theater Digital Projector

This is topic Ideas for Home Theater Digital Projector in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000765

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-09-2009, 01:24 PM:

I am looking for a digital projector for a home theater room. I am looking to spend no more than $10,000 for the projector. I was looking at a Christie digital projector. Anyone have any recommendations for a really good digital projector? I am looking for one that can play HD Cable, BluRay, etc..

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 09-09-2009, 02:01 PM:

I don't think this thread is suppose to be in the film handler's forum... but anyways...

Infocus X10
I'd look into this one, it's real bargain for its price. You'd probably be better off to turn off the auto iris. I've had great luck with infocus projectors, and i've had my eye on this one. The only real catch is that the lens is a rather long throw, so you'll need a bit of space between your screen and projector.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 09-09-2009, 02:25 PM:

No idea if they are any good, but sounds on paper like the just-launched Epsons (TW5500 TW4400) should be checked out:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/09/07/epsons-eh-tw5500-and-eh-tw4400-flagship-projectors-seen-hanging/

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 09-09-2009, 08:43 PM:

I have a Panasonic AE3000 and a 125" 2.39:1 Carada screen. I'm very happy with it.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 09-09-2009, 08:44 PM:

What size screen are looking at projecting onto?

What is your light control like in your room?

Can you / do you want to make it pitch black, or will the projector have to compete with ambient light?

Five years ago, you had to spend $7,500-$10,000 to get a really good projector. Nowadays, I don't think that's so true any more. Sure, there are projectors that cost up to or more than twice as much as your budget, but I don't think they're going to produce a stunningly better image than something in the $3,500 - $5,000 range.

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-09-2009, 08:55 PM:

The throw is extremely short, I would say maybe 15-20 feet from digital to wall. The home theater room is mainly for games and cable and the occasional movie. The lighting will be both pitch black and slightly dim. It would be nice to have a projector that will have a great picture regardless of lighting. I am guessing that means I want something with extremely high lumens?

Also what kind of screen should I be looking to buy? I was thinking just the white perforated screen for a center channel behind. Someone made a mention of a yellow screen--don't believe I am familiar with a yellow screen.

I don't have a defined screen size yet. I am looking for something that won't be too overpowering and have the front row of a theater effect where you have to turn your entire head to see different parts of the screen. The screen will probably wind up being something around 7-10 feet in height by 12-15 feet in width.

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 09-09-2009, 09:16 PM:

That's a big picture for sitting that close. You're going to lose light projecting on that much surface area. You may need to purchase an after market "fish eye" lens. Keep in mind perforated screens lose light. I've mentioned on here before I'm a fan of speakers just below the screen... but I believe someone also made mention of screen materials that aren't perforated, yet are supposedly acoustically transparent. You will also need to have the screen further back from the wall to accommodate space for the speakers... since space is an issue.
Lighting in the room is usually an issue as well. I bought black out curtains for my living room. Works fairly well. I find having any lights on will have a negative impact on the image.

Figuring out your geek room does take lots of consideration. It's much easier to get everything the way you want it the first shot. Good luck [beer]

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 09-10-2009, 05:13 AM:

I think the first question to ask yourself is which type of projector technology? The most common are either single chip DLP or 3LCD. Personally I prefere and bought a 3LCD simply because there is no rainbow effect caused by the use of a color wheel. Now not everyone can see this effect, though I still have not met a projectionist who can't. I believe it is now the bigger seller of the two main consumer technologies.

As for filling a screen that big around the 1500-2000 lumin would do and also have some room for ambient light.

Personally I agree that the screen is probably too big for the room. As with a cinema unless its real Imax you dont wan't to be closer than 1 screen hight back from the screen, 3 hights back is probably a good back row for 1080p gear.

I have a Panasonic AE100 720p projector which I use on a 6ft wide screen in the living room or on a 16ft inflatable in the backyard. I love mine!

Personally Geoff's AE3000 1080p is a great choice. It will automatically zoom out to a preset a full scope image at the touch of a button on your genuine 2.39 screen [thumbsup]

1600 lumins and 3lcd.

The other thing to look into is replacement bulb price before you buy, some brands are reasonable others are quite a shock [Eek!]

With 1080p models now starting at $999 it no longer something for the rich and famous!

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-10-2009, 05:54 AM:

Look at the Canon LCOS video projectors. The contrast ratio is relatively poor, but the image is "smooth" and without visible pixels. They come with fairly short lenss, which may or may not be what you want. One issue with these is that the color balance tends toward "blue," which may or may not bother you.

Another option would be a CRT projector. I've never liked them, personally, but they have the best contrast ratio. Unfortunately, light output is limited.

Don't buy a single-chip DLP without testing it. Some people are really bothered by the color-wheel effect, while others aren't. Newer ones are better than older models (color wheels spin faster now).

Seriously, though, you could get a decent 35mm setup for your price range (either two machines or a single machine with a platter or double-MUT).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-10-2009, 04:22 PM:

If I were going to buy a home projector I'd definately look very closley at all the brands of LCOS projectors. None of the others would interest me in the slightest because of the visible pixel issues.

Mark

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-10-2009, 09:16 PM:

Mark-

I am familiar with the technology behind LCoS projectors--I don't know any brands that actually offer LCoS though. Do you know any brands off the top of your head that use LCoS chips/technology?

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 09-10-2009, 10:09 PM:

I got lucky thanks to a friend and purchased a Pioneer KURO FPJ1 while it was being discontinued. I'd highly recommend getting something that is 1080p.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 09-11-2009, 12:53 AM:

quote:
Do you know any brands off the top of your head that use LCoS chips/technology?

| IP: Log

quote: Scott Norwood
Look at the Canon LCOS video projectors.

I think both sony and jvc offer a similar product.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-11-2009, 05:03 PM:

JVC was the originator of LCOS along with Hughes Aircraft back in the late 1980s. Their first public demonstration of the technology for professional cinema use was in the late '90s when Star Wars Episode I came out. Got to see it myself at Pacific's Winnetka at that time, along with an early version of DLP (complete with scalloped fixed-pattern noise) for the same film the same day over at the Burbank Media Center.

Was fun to compare the look of DLP, LCOS, and a 35mm print all on the same day at different locations.

For home use at present, I'm a fan of 3LCD machines. The current Panasonic AE-PT series are great bang-for-the-buck 1080p machines.

Yes, Sony sells the technology as well - they call their implementation of it SXRD.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-11-2009, 09:05 PM:

What really caught my eye was the incredible color reproduction on the JVC LCOS they demoed a number of years back at Showest. It was stunning to say the least.

Mark

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-12-2009, 04:50 AM:

Lately I've been installing the Sanyo PLVZ3000 and it is really breathtaking especially in HD. I preview in BluebloodyRay usualy the Fifth Element or Dark Knight and the clients are very impressed by the clarity. It also has much more adjustments than most projectors in image correction e.t.c. It does not have keystone correction but it has a nifty lens shift which works perfectly thus you do not screw up the ratios. Of course if your budget can handle you can go with the Sanyo PLV-HD2000E but that costs a lot.
Demetris

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 09-12-2009, 11:30 AM:

If the budget is tight, CRTs still give good bang for buck.

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-12-2009, 12:09 PM:

Demetris-

I fell in love with the PLV-HD2000E, looked it up to purchase it and found out Sanyo has officially discontinued selling the model

[Frown]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-12-2009, 01:11 PM:

Welcome to Home Video...the PLV-Z3000 is the current king of the hill for them. How many can I put you down for? [Wink]

Steve

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-12-2009, 01:22 PM:

Might I recommend this quality blu-ray player for your needs?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-13-2009, 12:03 AM:

Brad--is that an actually product? If so, why? I mean, it's more expensive than an HDCAM-SR or D5 deck.

I can understand super-expensive turntables and such, but I don't see the advantage of this sort of thing for digital formats. Bits are bits. Do the $200 Blu-ray players really suck that badly at reading the bits off of the disks?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-13-2009, 01:29 AM:

No lie...I've see the differences in the picture quality using the exact same disc in different Blu-Ray players playing on DCinema grade projectors...I was rather taken aback myself! I would have thought it wouldn't have made much if any difference but when blown up to 35-40 feet wide...sure enough...the higher end player looked NOTABLY better. Go figure.

Steve

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-13-2009, 01:49 AM:

Ugh. I'm happy with my 80GB PS3 with its 4 USB ports, SACD compatibility and flash card slots. I guess I'll use the other $150,000 on hookers and cocaine in Las Vegas!
[evil]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-14-2009, 10:22 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
when blown up to 35-40 feet wide...sure enough...the higher end player looked NOTABLY better.

Yah, but Steve, that might be true for the $2000 units vs. the $200 units. But this isn't just a high-end player -- this is way beyond any of that; this one of those ridiculously priced player designed specifically for that niche market where the targeted buyer is the idiot who will buy a product simply because it is the most expensive. Usually these purchases are ego-driven, usually some endowment-challenged male trying to compensate but buying what no other sane person would buy.

Half the stuff in those esoteric, foo-foo audio-videophile stores is marketed just for those filthy rich, DUMB people. Sure, they are only a small slice of the market, but you just sell fewer units and price them so you still make a huge profit anyway. Bottom line, if this stuff was so good, how come professionals don't use them in studios and pro installations? Cause they are frauds.

The reason they only need to manufacture 50 of these BluRay players is because they are selling them at $135,000!

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-14-2009, 11:43 AM:

quote: Frank Angel
if this stuff was so good, how come professionals don't use them
in studios and pro installations

That's always been my argument against stuff like $100/foot cables. I don't have much knowledge of what recording studios use, but I do know that the guys who do film and TV sound generally use pretty generic good-quality microphone and line-level cables (Belden, Canare, etc.) that can be had for well under $.50/foot. If this stuff is good enough for the people who record the sound, what could possibly justify ultra-high-end cables for one's home stereo?

Same thing with movie theatres: even the best houses use inexpensive cables for solar-cell, sound rack, and speaker wiring, yet they sound far better than any home setup with "Monster Cable" this and "audiophile" that.

I do find it curious that there is a difference in picture quality among Blu-ray players. I don't have any experience with the format on big screens, though (absolutely no one has ever even asked me about it as a possible screening format; the video people all either want HDCAM or various SD formats).

Posted by Vern Dias (Member # 5241) on 09-14-2009, 09:41 PM:

I highly reccomend the new JVC projectors. They are the RS15, RS25, and RS35. Priced from roughly $2,500 to $10,000.

They are LCOS.

Stay away from the Panasonic LCD projectors, the smoothscreen technology seriously softens the image.

Vern

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-18-2009, 02:58 PM:

Last time I asked it was special order. I will ask again when I am back in Cyprus but they want some serious money for it. It's over 20K Euro I think although who wouldn't love that. Go for the PLV-Z3000 you will not regret it.

EDIT: Sorry for the edit. It might be better to invest in a high contrast screen instead of a high powered HD projector (you won't find much of the last). I installed in my boss home this projector with a Screenhawk SilverScreen High Gain and no light brings the quality down. After all the PLV-Z3000 has a contrast ratio of 65000:1 ! And don't forget that the actual black of the projector is the 'white' of the screen with no light hitting on it.

Demetris

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-18-2009, 08:47 PM:

The PLV-Z3000 only has 1200 ANSI lumens. Wouldn't a digital projector being used in a lighted room require 1500 or so lumens to keep the image?

I keep looking at the Epson EH-TW5500. If I read everything correct on the summary of it, this projector won't be released for another month. As of now, we are having a wine room built in the house which will require a week or two of work--the media room is the next to be built. Would it be wise to just wait until its release? Also, is it a mistake to purchase a newly released projector for any type of issues that might arise?

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-19-2009, 07:04 AM:

quote: Andy Bajew
Wouldn't a digital projector being used in a lighted room require 1500 or so lumens to keep the image?

Not necessarily. A High contrast screen will give you the benefit of even hitting a flood light on the screen and still see the image projected. 1200 Ansi is a standard in basic HT projectors. If you are looking for a DLP piece perhaps this Optoma might do the trick at 2000 Ansi. Invest in a High Contrast screen (and don't think hot spots like cinemas silver screens). See also this link.
Demetris

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 09-19-2009, 02:39 PM:

I have good experience with Epson (projectors) when it came to service.

They certainly have a lot of experience and long trayectory building lots of projector's models over the years.

As you may know, Seiko-Epson are known to be the OEM manufacturers of LCD panels used in many brands of projectors, as well as a manufacturer of optics and optical elements and precission machinery. And printers and watches, of course.

Certainly a totally brand-new model may have some bugs or issues with it. Just keep an eye for the early reviews and, if you think they're worth it, it's your choice. You'll have factory warranty for a year anyway, and it's always good to try to see a demo unit by yourself before commiting.

Otherwise, I have nothing bad to say about Epson (projection unit) or their service (which I have used), at least in Europe.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-20-2009, 09:20 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
would have thought it wouldn't have made much if any difference but when blown up to 35-40 feet wide...sure enough...the higher end player looked NOTABLY better. Go figure.

Having been involved in high end audio for a number of decades now I can truthfully say thats why there IS a higher end!!

Its a paradigm actually... Truth is that high end gear that is built to very high standards(mil-spec) but might not offer any better performance. Some higher end gear which is not built as well but may perform better then gear built to mil spec. High end gear that is built well and performs well are few and far between!!!

Mark

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 09-20-2009, 10:29 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Having been involved in high end audio for a number of decades

If you mean home audio, I hope you know what I mean when I say I honestly can't hear the difference between my SL-1200 and my friends TD-124!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-20-2009, 07:01 PM:

quote:
I honestly can't hear the difference between my SL-1200 and my friends TD-124!

I've owned both over the years and the TD-124 is idler driven... and it has alot higher rumble spec as a result. The SL-1200 if you are referring to Technics is a dam good tt. Now when it comes to cartridges thats where lies the huge differences... ditto for phono front ends.

Mark

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 09-30-2009, 09:25 PM:

Okay guys. I have, as of now, decided on going with the Epson PowerLite Pro Cinema 7500UB Projector. However, my issue now is figuring out screen size and the proper throw. Lens/screen calculators make me go insane for some reason--I have the hardest time with them.

Here are some figures of the room-with the 16:9 ratio-could anyone possibly help lead me in the steps I need to take or give me some information of what I need to be looking at for the actual screen.

The dimension of the area where the screen can be is 166 inches wide by 108 inches tall. The length of the room from screen to entry is 213 inches-the projector can be placed with a diagonal throw within the first 189 inches from the screen-wall or placed 213 inches from the screen wall for a straight throw.

If this makes sense to anyone, I would greatly appreciate the help. Also, the seating area will be a maximum of 13 feet away from the screen (probably will place two rows from 6-13 feet) We are hoping for a screen size around 100-110 inches.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-30-2009, 09:42 PM:

Do you want a 4x3 screen, a 16x9 screen, a 2.35 screen, or some other ratio? This will affect everything else. The Epson has a zoom ratio of about 2:1 and a 16x9 chip, so you could do a 2.35 screen with side masking, if you wanted to have a cinema-like image. You would need to manually zoom and re-center the image when switching between other ratios and scope. If you aren't using a perforated screen, you will need to figure out where to put the loudspeakers, and possibly allow room for them above, below, or to the sides of the screen.

Is your 100-110" screen size a width measurement or a diagonal measurement? The math is easier if you use width and height measurements, rather than diagonals.

It sounds as if your seating will be fairly close. If we go by the SMPTE guideline that seats should be 2-4 screen heights back from the screen, and if you want a 2.35:1 screen, you are probably looking at a 3'x7' image, which is smaller than what you mentioned.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-07-2009, 09:58 PM:

SMPTE should really revisit that spec. First off, that means you can never get really immersive viewing. I like to sit much MUCH closer because I want the image to block out most of my peripheral vision. And how does that spec reconcile with 15/70 IMAX or Cinerama? So the bigger the screen the further away they want you to sit, which pretty much negates the whole reason for installing a big screen in the first place.

That figure had to have been based on the image quality of the day, which, given the grain structure of stocks in the 40s and 50s and the steadiness of the projected images in "typical" theatres, the committee came up with that figure, which I contend is pretty subjective of what "looks" comfortable it is not a value based on anything but what a bunch of guys felt was ok. And of course, most theatre never paid any attention to it, especially once CinemaScope made its debute. Time for a revisit.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 10-08-2009, 11:20 PM:

Panasonic AE-4000 sounds good, and reasonably priced.

Review:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ae4000_projector_review.htm

Posted by Vern Dias (Member # 5241) on 10-10-2009, 03:49 PM:

If the new Panasonic is anything like it's predecessors, it can't do justice to all the detail inherent in properly transferred and encoded BD sources.

That's because its an LCD projector and the Panasonic Smoothscreen technology that is used to hide the wider gaps between pixels also softens the image considerably.

For my eyes, the newer LCOS based Sony and JVC projectors deliver a far more detailed image then the Panasonic.

Vern

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-12-2009, 04:18 PM:

The LCOS projectors can have their issues as well due to panel misalignment, which can cause softness and color separation artifacts. The Sonys do have adjustments, but there are reports that some panels are outside the realm of perfect adjustment.

That Projector Central review does address the SmoothScreen effects on the image:

quote:
Smooth-screen filter. Panasonic home theater projectors are famous for their Smooth Screen technology--essentially a filter that removes visible pixelation. The AE4000 has this same feature. We used to think that Smooth Screen reduced the sharpness of the image. It does not. Keep in mind when setting up a competing projector with the AE4000 in a side by side test, the "0" settings on the sharpness menus are not identical. Panasonic's models always have the sharpness setting default to zero with no artificial edge enhancement. Competing models usually default to zero also, but their so-called "0" setting often has some built in edge enhancement. On such models, the sharpness control needs to be turned off, or down to -5 or -10 depending on the model in question, to equal what Panasonic models are already defaulted to. Conversely, you can turn the sharpness setting on the AE4000 up to +5 or so to more closely approximate what 0 is on competing units. Once you balance out the edge enhancement, there is no significant difference in image sharpness between the AE4000 and other models in its price range. And if you boost the Detail Clarity Processor to +3 or +4, you get an extremely sharp picture with an abundance of detail definition.

Either the reviewer drank the Panasonic kool-aid, or Panasonic has made some strides in reducing the negative aspects of the technology. Time will tell if other reviewers comment on the picture quality.

At a breakthrough price of just under $2k, the Panasonic seems like an incredibly good value! The PT-AE3000 listed at $2999, and streeted for about $2500. If this was a crappy projector with a budget reputation, it wouldn't matter, but Panasonic has a well-regarded product, and the other manufacturers are going to have to adjust their prices to compete effectively.

If I could swing $2k right now, the Panasonic would be at the top of my list to replace my Sony HS51!

Posted by Andy Bajew (Member # 5330) on 10-12-2009, 04:28 PM:

So the media room project is about to start. I am thinking very heavily on waiting for the Epson EH-TW5500 to be released in November. This seems like everything I want. I have heard a rumor though that there is no keystone correction on this projector--has anyone heard the same?

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-13-2009, 09:23 PM:

Andy, if it's the projector of your dreams, I'd first look at your angles, in a small room you may not have angles that are severe enough to cause more than very mild keystoning and you can correct that mechanically with ultrablack velvet masking -- the really black stuff that won't let ANY light show on it -- it's the black hole of masking material.

You can get the nice perpendicular line with the aid of the masking rather than keystone correction in the projector. Besides, digital keystone correction can sometime cause unwanted artifacts and degrade the image.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 10-14-2009, 10:58 PM:

There is a review of the Epson EH-TW5500 here in case it's of any help.